Community Conserved

Areas in India
A Directory

edited by
Neema Pathak

Kalpavriksh 2009
Credits
Citation: Pathak, N. (ed) 2009. Community Conserved Areas in India - A Directory. Kalpavriksh,
Pune/Delhi.
Project personnel:
Project coordination, research, compilation, content editing: Neema Pathak
Editorial help for state chapters: Ashish Kothari and Sujoy Chowdhury
Research and compilation help for case studies: Roopa Bandekar, Roshni Kutty, Shantha Bhushan,
Kaustubh Moghe, Batool Balasinorwala, Tasneem Balasinorwala
Research and compilation help for state info-sheets: Saili Palande and Anuradha Arjunwadkar
Administrative help: Govind Khalsode
Maps: R. Ravindranath, Foundation for Ecologcal Security, Anand, Gujarat
Design and illustrations: Madhuvanti Anantharajan (many of the illustrations are based on motifs from
traditional art forms of India)
Cover design: Madhuvanti Anantharajan
Cover photographs: Ashish Kothari, Sandeep Tambe, Asad Rahmani, Jean Howman, Madhu Ramnath,
Raghavendra Singh, Vivek Gour-Broome
Ascertaining scientific names: Aparna Watwe and Vivek Gour-Broome
External editing: Vidyadhar Gadgil
Proof-reading: Ashish Kothari and Shridhar Watwe
Tabular database on CCAs: Anisha Shankar, Saili Palande and Persis Taraporevala
Tabular database on resource persons and institutions: Erica Taraporevala and Persis Taraporevala

Sponsorship and funding*:

For initial research and compilation:
Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India (MoEF), Paryavaran Bhavan, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi – 110003. Website: envfor.nic.in
Foundation for Ecological Security (FES), Post Bag # 29, Anand,388001,india.
Website: www.fes.org.in
For updating and editing:
Society for Promotion of Wasteland Development, 14 A Vishnu Digambar Marg (Rouse Avenue Lane), New Delhi
110002. E-mail: spwd_delhi@yahoo.com
For design and printing:
Personal donations
MISEREOR, Mozart StraB9, 52064 Aachen, Germany. Website: www.misereor.de
National Biodiversity Authority, Government of India, 475, 9th South Cross Street, Kapaleeswarar Nagar,
Neelankarai, Chennai - 600 041, Tamil Nadu, India. Email: nba_india@vsnl.net Website: www.nbaindia.org

Printed at:
Mudra
383, Narayan Peth, Pune 411030.
mudraoffset@gmail.com

*
Opinions expressed in this document are not necessarily the opinions of the MoEF, FES, or SPWD. The opinions are
those of the authors, contributors and the Kalpavriksh team members.
Contents
Preface and acknowledgements ............................................................................... 1
Introduction and how to use the Directory .............................................................. 3
Acronyms .................................................................................................................... 9
List of vernacular words ......................................................................................... 12
List of species mentioned in the Directory .............................................................. 18
State chapter contributors’ names and affiliations ..................................................... 31

Maps
• Community conserved areas in India - a location map ..................................................... 32
• CCAs with the forest cover ........................................................................................... 34
• CCAs with bio-geographic zones ................................................................................... 36
• List of CCAs as referred to in the map ........................................................................... 38

Community Conserved Areas in India – An overview ............................................. 41

State chapters and case studies

Andhra Pradesh .......................................................................................................... 101
Arunachal Pradesh ...................................................................................................... 129
Assam ....................................................................................................................... 151
Bihar ......................................................................................................................... 167
Chhattisgarh .............................................................................................................. 173
Gujarat ..................................................................................................................... 201
Himachal Pradesh ..................................................................................................... 229
Jammu and Kashmir ................................................................................................... 261
Karnataka .................................................................................................................. 281
Kerala ....................................................................................................................... 323
Maharashtra ............................................................................................................... 355
Manipur ..................................................................................................................... 413
Meghalaya ................................................................................................................. 435
Nagaland ................................................................................................................... 443
Orissa ....................................................................................................................... 469
Punjab ...................................................................................................................... 557
Rajasthan .................................................................................................................. 571
Sikkim ...................................................................................................................... 627
Tamil Nadu ................................................................................................................ 641
Tripura ...................................................................................................................... 669
Uttar Pradesh ............................................................................................................. 679
Uttarakhand ............................................................................................................... 705
West Bengal ............................................................................................................... 775

Annexures
1. List of case studies in alphabetical order ................................................................... 787
2. CCAs with location, ecosystem/kind of initiatives and area (arranged state-wise) ........... 790
3. Checklist of approaches and activities for effective management, assessment and greater
recognition of CCAs ............................................................................................... 797
4. Indian laws and policies relevant to community conserved areas ................................. 799
5. Suggested guidelines for establishment and management of community reserves under
the Indian Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2002 .............................................. 803
6. Communities do conserve! Statement of the national workshop on community conserved
biodiverse areas, 21 to 23 November 2001 ............................................................... 809
7. Some other Kalpavriksh and TILCEPA publications on community conserved areas (2001
till 2006) and relevant international websites ............................................................ 813
Preface and acknowledgements
Compiling this Directory on local community’s efforts at conservation or what we would be
referring to as Community Conserved Areas (CCAs) has been an extremely energising and enriching
experience for us at Kalpavriksh. The areas that my colleagues and I had an opportunity to visit and
the communities that we interacted with either directly or through the authors of various chapters
and case studies, opened up completely new frontiers of conservation to us. My understanding
of community’s role in conservation and that of many other Kalpavriksh members has grown
tremendously since we started research and compilation for this Directory. This understanding and
the consequent strengthening of our conviction helped some of us push for a greater recognition
for these efforts at national and international forums.
This Directory is a humble tribute to the heroic efforts of these communities and their courage
to initiate and continue conservation against all odds. A tribute to all those who dare to risk their
lives to save those of other species, all those who live a simpler life to be able to accommodate
the lives of other species, and all those who are only asking for a right to live and let live- a right
to conserve.
For us the publication of this Directory is not an end in itself. Our association established before
and during this process, with community members, conservation groups, researchers, activists,
government officials and others will continue in times to come. More examples of CCAs continue to
trickle in. For practical reasons we have had to stop including them in the Directory to facilitate its
publication. However, Kalpavriksh has established a database on CCAs, which will continuously be
updated and hopefully will soon become an interactive web based process. In the meanwhile our
association with those sites that we have already come to know will carry on.
For us it is heartening to know that many of the individuals and groups who were involved with
this research and documentation are now taking the processes forward, either by carrying out
more in-depth research on CCAs in their areas or by supporting these initiatives in ways that they
can.
We would like to express our gratitude to all those who have made it possible for us to bring out
this Directory. The initial financial help and support from the Ministry of Environment and Forests
(MoEF), and Foundation of Ecological Security (FES) was crucial in establishing a large network of
individuals and organisations, whose inputs were critical to the directory. A subsequent grant from
Society for Promotion of Wasteland Development (SPWD) made it possible to update, edit and
design the Directory. This directory could not have been printed without the timely financial help
from MISERIOR and the National Biodiversity Authority, Government of India.
Most analytical chapters for this report were contributed by state co-ordinators identified by
Kalpavriksh at the beginning of the project. All the contributors have not only answered queries
over the years but have also waited patiently for their papers to be published. We are extremely
grateful to all state coordinators for working over and over again on their chapters, and for
their patience and continued support. Coordinating contributions from tens of organisations and
individuals spread across the country and continuous following up with them was indeed one of
the biggest challenges in this project. But for the cooperation from all concerned, this task would
have been impossible.
Coordination, compilation, networking, meetings, travel for field verifications, information
updating, editing and much else related to this project was achieved with a very small grant spread
over seven years. This was made possible because of the contribution of case studies largely gratis
by most authors or those who gave time and effort to comment upon the case studies that we had
compiled. Voluntary help came from many to take on the tasks when needed. Personal donations
came at various points in time to support the project.
Many organisations and individuals helped us travel to some of these sites and supported us
locally, while others helped in bringing out awareness material for distribution. We are thankful
to Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS), Nagaland Empowerment of People through Economic
Development (NEPED), Samatha, Vrikshamitra, Aranyak, Vasundhara, IUCN, and many more.
None of this would have been possible without the warmth, hospitality and sharing of information,
knowledge and their lives by dozens of communities with us. We will always be grateful to these
great teachers many of whom are mentioned in subsequent chapters, while many may not get a
mention for which I apologise.
Without continuous questioning, discussions and debates within Kalpavriksh, it would have been
impossible for us to clear our own understanding of what we meant by community conservation
1
2
and what kind of examples could be documented for this volume. Kalpavriksh members voluntarily
undertook responsibilities and made available infrastructural and other support for this project,
which never had enough resources. Many thanks to colleagues, Ashish Kothari, Shantha Bhushan
and Roshni Kutty for their critical inputs, editorial help, help in sourcing information and an
unconditional support during this long process. Shantha Bhushan and Erica Taraporevala also
helped financially during the crucial stages. Thanks to Roopa Bandekar, Neeraj Vagholikar, Manju
Menon, Pankaj Sekhasaria, Sujatha Padmanabhan, Sunita Rao, Erica Taraporewala, Tasneem
Balasinorwala, Kanchi Kohli, Seema Bhatt, Tejaswini Apte, Anuprita Patel, (late) Madhulika Goyal,
Anuradha (Swati) Arjunwadkar, Anisha Shankar, Sharmila Deo, Kaustubh Moghe, Vivek Gour-
Broome, Ajay Mahajan and all other Kalpavriksh members, and Madhuvanti Anantharajan. Many
thanks to ever enthusiastic Saili Palande, Persis Taraporewala, and Arshiya Bose who came as a
godsend at the final leg of this process to help tie up numerous loose ends. Thanks are also due
to Madhu Sarin, Asad Rahmani, Bittu Sahgal, Nitin Rai, Mohan Hirabai Hiralal, Kanhaiya Gujjar,
Vijay Jardhari, Devaji Tofa and Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend and other members of IUCN Theme on
Indigenous and Local Communities, Equity and Protected Areas (TILCEPA) for their critical inputs
in the debate related to Community Conserved Areas, which has helped shape this report.
Many thanks are also due to all those who have contributed photos.
Neema Pathak
March 2009
Introduction and how to use the Directory
Introduction
This Directory is an attempt to bring to the forefront the numerous lesser known efforts (with
their strengths and limitations) of ordinary people for conservation of biodiversity. The Directory
also presents the views and analyses of a number of individuals and organisations on community
efforts for conservation. Henceforth we refer to these efforts as Community Conserved Areas
(CCAs). This term, introduced as part of initiating this work on the Directory about a decade back is
now part of international conservation discourse, policy and practice. A working definition of CCAs
has been discussed in chapter 1.
This compilation gains particular significance today when there are more processes leading
towards destruction of habitats than those leading to their conservation. They have much to
contribute, by indicating paths towards more sustainable development, changing the current
economic and development paradigm aimed at maximum profit with little regard for nature or
natural resources.
The Directory is an outcome of a realisation that:
• Resource consumption across various sections of human society have reached levels that are
causing shrinkage of habitat and disappearance of many species.
• The hope for the survival of other species is deeply linked to increasing the constituency for their
cause.
• Conservation needs to become a mass movement rather than the passion of a few.
• Human societies, livelihoods and development issues are as much linked to the conservation of
biological diversity as to its destruction.
Through the process of compiling this Directory as also the works of other distinguished researchers,
NGOs, government officials, and academics it is now clear to us that there are numerous examples
across the country where local communities have either revived or continued their traditional
systems of natural resource and wildlife management. This has often been in the face of strong
commercial or other pressures and government apathy or opposition. Also it is clear that there is
a vast diversity in how these initiatives operate, what they achieve and the limitations they have.
We have also realised sadly that most of these initiatives remain unnoticed, unrecognised and
unappreciated. The role and potential of these initiatives in achieving conservation has remained
grossly underplayed and underutilised.

Methodology followed for compiling the Directory

Considering that the examples of CCAs are numerous, scattered across the country and have not
been much written about, it would have been impossible for any one individual or organisation to
collect all the information alone. This work, therefore, is an outcome of collaborations with a wide
range of individuals and organisations.
This Directory was put together in three phases:
Phase 1 (funded by Ministry of Environment and Forests and Foundation for Ecological
Security): Networking and documentation
• Individuals and institutions/organisations (at village or town, region, state or national level)
working on the issues of community conservation were identified.
• A questionnaire was prepared, which was widely discussed with researchers, government officials,
NGOs and others before being finalised.
• The questionnaire was sent to more than 300 individuals and organisations for generating case
studies. This involved long periods of following up to get responses.
• Additionally, 25 individuals and organisations were identified to coordinate preparation of the
state/regional analyses chapters. Each of these was supported with nominal funds. Finally we
received analysis chapters from 17 of the coordinators, of which 14 could be finalised. For the
other states our team put together some basic information based on secondary literature review
or our own field experiences.
• State coordinators were requested to carry out the documentation at three levels: State or region
wise detailed analysis of historical and current context to CCAs; a minimum of three detailed and
well researched case studies; and collection of as many other case studies as possible from any
other source, which were then verified, wherever possible.

3
4
• Some of the states and selected sites for detailed case studies were visited by the project team
members.
• Information on case studies was also generated through secondary literature survey and through
personal contacts with community representatives or people working with communities, during
workshops, meetings, and other such forums. Such case studies were sent to experts in the
respective states to comment and verify.
• Each state chapter was reviewed by the editing team many times over to identify gaps in
information and verification of facts. By the end of 2002 we had collected all state chapters and
finalised them with the authors.
Phase 2 (not funded): Content editing, analysis and discussions
• Considering the disparity in quantity and quality of information in each chapter, the information
was reorganised by the editing team. Secondary literature review was done by the team to fill
in the gaps which could not be filled in by the authors. In some cases, the state chapters were
reorganised by the editing team using available documents (with permission from respective
authors).
• Through personal and e-mail discussions the project team facilitated a discussion on a working
definition of CCAs. This working definition was then used to select case studies for this
publication.
• Some discussions were also generated on criteria to be used for the selection of CCAs.
• During this period more case studies were generated by the team through secondary literature
review, these case studies were sent for further verification to known groups in respective states
and regions wherever possible.
• Many of the case studies that could not be verified or for which we were not able to fill crucial
gaps in information were not included in this report. However, such examples have been included
in a database, which is continuously being updated.
• A map was subsequently prepared using GIS to show the location of these sites.
Phase 3 (funded by Society for Promotion of Wasteland Development and MISEREOR)
Updating, final content and language editing, illustrations, verification of scientific names,
compiling lists of contact details, preparation of maps, collecting photos, external editing, design
and printing.

Who is the Directory meant for?

The Directory is aimed at anyone interested in knowing about these efforts of local communities.
In particular we hope that the Directory will be of use to:
1. The local communities themselves (once we are able to translate this information in few local
languages). We hope this will be seen by them as an appreciation of their effort and also be
used by them to compare notes with other similar efforts, and identify their own strengths
and weaknesses. We hope some of these communities will be able to establish contacts with
each other and visit each other to share their experiences. We also hope that the Directory will
provide recognition and respect to their efforts thereby strengthening them.
2. Local/grassroots level civil society organisations working on any issues related to the local
communities. Hopefully such groups will find this useful to understand why communities decide
to conserve and how they do it. Also to understand that conservation is linked with all aspects
of community life and hence important for all community based organisations to understand
and imbibe.
3. Policy makers, who we hope will be able to make use of some of the lessons that these
initiatives are highlighting. We also hope that this compilation will help them understand better
the constraints these initiatives face and kind of support they require.
4. Academics and researchers who will hopefully find many gaps and lessons, and much to be
researched in these initiatives, and thereby encourage them to carry out some more in-depth
research. Who we also hope will engage with the conserving communities as experts in their
own right, to help communities overcome the limitation of their initiatives.
5. National level civil society organisations, who will hopefully encourage the government to create
a more conducive environment for these initiatives.
6. International community, who we hope will keep supporting CCAs across the world.
7. Donor agencies, in helping them understand the intricacies of community conservation action,
particularly when it concerns external financial and other interventions. We also hope CCAs
will find themselves in their agenda albeit taking into account all the factors mentioned in this
Directory.
 5
How is the Directory structured ?
1. Community Conserved Areas in India - an overview, shares our understanding of CCAs and
presents an analysis of these initiatives based on the information contained in the subsequent
sections.
2. State chapters and case studies present analyses and examples from 23 states in India.
3. The state chapters include the historical context and present status of CCAs. These also include
a map which shows the location of known CCA sites.
4. For some states where detailed description and analysis of CCAs could not be done an introductory
information sheet has been provided. The latter should just be used as a reference to the state
while reading the case studies rather than an analysis of CCAs in these states.
State chapters with detailed descriptions and analyses are available for Ladakh region in Jammu
and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh,
Nagaland, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Sikkim, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh,
Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
States for which an introductory information sheet has been provided are Assam, Jammu and
Kashmir, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, West Bengal, and Maharashtra.
Each state chapter is followed by case studies from those regions. We have used a common
reference code for all case studies:
CCA/name of the state/case study number/name of the district/name of the site/kind of initiative.

For easy reference there is, on the first page of each case study, a symbol representing the
main ecosystem that it refers to:
symbol
case studies - gujarat

Below are the various ecosystems represented and their corresponding symbols:

Forest conservation

Wetland conservation

Marine conservation

Grassland conservation

Conservation of a particular species

6
For easy reading we have tried to arrange the available information in more or less similar format
and under common heads, as shown in the box below:

Structure of a case study:

Full name of CCA Site, District

Background
(basic details of the site such as location, size, legal status, demographic information, socio-
cultural and economic information, any other special features and so on)
Towards community conservation
(history of the initiative including who initiated, when and how; current status including
institutions in place, rules and regulations, conflict resolution mechanisms, and so on)
Impacts of community effort
(positive and negative ecological, social, and economic impacts that have resulted from the
initiative)
Opportunities and constraints
(what are the main hurdles and threats faced by the initiative? What are the main opportunities
available for overcoming these hurdles/threats? Any support received, how, from whom and
so on)
Conclusion
(any last words, especially about the way ahead)
References (if any)
(full citations, and if referring to individuals, information on who they are, and approximately
when they were spoken to for obtaining the information)
For more information contact
(address and phone/email (if any) details of the local contact person(s)

In some states we have tried to include some case studies which did not have sufficient information
under one head, “Other villages”.
5. An attempt has been made to plot all the documented CCA sites on a national map as also on
state maps.
6. The last section consists of annexures including: a tabular database on resource people and
institutions, a tabular database on CCAs, and a tabular information on laws and policies related
to CCAs in India, their strengths and weaknesses in being able to support CCAs. It also contains
an analysis of the two new categories of the Wild Life Protection Act and their role in supporting
CCAs (an guidelines for one of them), and minutes of a national workshop on CCAs, organised
in 2001.

What kind of examples does the Directory not contain?

We came across and heard of many more examples than we finally present in the Directory. The
following kinds of examples have not been included in the Directory:
1. Where we could not get enough information or could not make a field trip to confirm when the
information was scant.
2. Where we could not get a local contact to fill major gaps in information.
3. Many traditional examples such as sacred groves, which still exist near a village but villagers
have little interaction or association with the grove (accept a continued faith in the temple
inside).
4. Many initiatives under the government sponsored Joint Forest Management (JFM), where much
has been written about them. However, we have included examples of JFM in areas where JFM
came subsequent to the community initiative or where community initiative continues even in
the post-JFM scenario.
 7
Constraints and limitations of the Directory
Documentation of these case studies has not been an easy task. Barring a few, getting information
on such initiatives has been quite challenging. Case studies have diverse sources: some were
commissioned to the state coordinators, some were taken from researchers, some were writte by
community represetatives, some by members of Kalpavriksh or those associated with Kalpavriksh
based on short visits to an area, while many were collected from secondary sources. This diversity
of sources has also made the case studies very diverse in their content and quality. While some
are detailed and well researched others may be just a compilation of some basic information on
the initiative, while still others are somewhere in between.
Mainly because of lack of existing information, this Directory does not claim to be an exhaustive
compilation of such efforts in the country. Indeed throughout the entire process of compiling it, we
heard of many more CCAs from state to state but could not get details on all of them.
The Directory compilation process continuously faced financial constraints. Considering that
available information on CCAs was scant, resources would have been required to undertake travel,
commission primary collection of data, carry out some scientific research to ascertain the impacts
of conservation efforts, and organise site specific and state level workshops. Though some of the
above was carried out with help from many partners, but much remains to be done.
Very often it was difficult to decide, based on available information, whether a certain example
is indeed a CCA (and not just a community natural resource management initiative with little or no
focus on conservation). We have included such examples in the database, realising that some of
these may not be CCAs after a closer examination. We also realise that we may have eliminated
certain examples as not being CCAs, but closer examination may show that they are indeed good
examples of community conservation.
We have tried to ascertain and cross-check the scientific names of plants and animals to the
extent possible. However, at times names are mentioned in local languages and we have not been
able to get the English and scientific names for the same.
We have tried to confirm the sources of information and have tried to verify contents and
information that is contained in the case studies to the extent that we could, however it was
logistically impossible for us to cross-check each and every case study. We do take the responsibility
for the mistakes and would be grateful for those who can help us further clarify and correct the
information. The same is true for scientific names, glossary and others.
Finally community efforts are dynamic and in many of the examples presented here it was not
easy to keep updating the information regularly. The process of compilation of the state chapters
and the case studies began in 2000. Many case studies and most state chapters were written then.
While we have been able to update the information for some case studies and most state chapters,
there are some that we failed to get an update on or could only partially update.
We hope that this documentation, even with all its limitations, will serve as a baseline information
on CCAs to further build on. We also hope it will create enough interest in readers to explore new
or undocumented CCAs, to get more in-depth information on the ones profiled here and also to
support them in the ways they need support, and to support and help initiate such initiatives
elsewhere. We would also be grateful for any additions and/or corrections from the readers.

Commonly used references

We have tried to ascertain scientific names of plants and animals as much as possible. However,
we may have missed out on some. We have referred to the following documents for ascertaining
scientific names:
Plants: International Plant Names Index (IPNI), www.ipni.org.
Mammals: Menon, V. (2003). Field Guide to Indian Mammals. Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt.
Limited, in association with Penguin Book India (P) Ltd. and Wildlife Trust of India. Delhi.
Birds: Grimmett, R., Inskipp, C. and Inskipp, T. (1998) Birds of the Indian Subcontinent, Oxford
University Press, New Delhi.
8
Outputs, spin-offs, and related activities
In addition to the State and Site Profiles, the process of compiling this Directory has helped in
initiating a number of processes and activities that were originally not planned or anticipated.
Some of these are mention below:
1. A map showing the location of CCAs. This GIS map has been prepared by Foudation for Ecological
Security, Anand, Gujarat.
2. A tabular database on CCAs in India (partly reproduced here and fully available in electronic
form with Kalpavriksh).
3. A set of posters on CCAs in India.
4. A photo-documentation of CCAs in India.
5. Many articles and papers on the subject in various national and international newspapers and
journals.
6. Presentations on the subject at various workshops and meetings to create an awareness about
these efforts.
7. A Workshop on Community Conserved Areas in India organised in 2001. This was the first
workshop on issues related to CCAs in India and was instrumental in bringing together a large
number of people connected to CCAs in some way. The report (with recommendations) of the
workshop was widely circulated, and is also included in this Directory as one of the annexures.
8. Deliberation on the definition of CCAs which in turn generated a national and international
debate on the same.
9. Inspiring the initiation of similar documentation in other parts of the world. A number of
publications on CCAs in different regions have since been published.
Among the prominent ones being the Policy Matters, No.12, September 2003 produced by
IUCN Commission on Economic, Environment and Social Policy (CEESP) and PARKS Vol. 16
No.1. Community Conserved Areas 2006 by the IUCN’s World Commission on Protected Areas
(WCPA) (see Annexure 7 for details and www.tilcepa.org for regional assessments and case
studies from around the world)
10. The results and finding of this project also formed an important base for arguing for international
recognition of such efforts at various forums including the World Parks Congress (WPC) and the
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (see Overview, section on International Context, for
details).
11. The understanding gained through this project also formed an important base for organising
a meeting on the new categories of Protected Areas, namely Community Reserves and
Conservation Reserves under the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act 2002. The meeting was
co-organised by BNHS, Wildlife Trust of India (WTI) and Kalpavriksh in Mumbai in February
2004. The statement of the workshop is attached as an annexure in this Directory.
12. Based on the experience from this process Kalpavriksh developed a draft set of guidelines for
effective implementation of ‘Community Reserves’, a new category of PA under the Wild Life
Protection (Amendment) Act 2002 (also attached as an annexure).
13. Some films have been made on the CCAs by Earth Care Films (For details contact Krishnendu
Bose at earthcare1@vsnl.com).
14. A film has been made on Mendha-Lekha village, called Medha ta Pitto (The Story of Mendha)
by Sudhir Agarwal, for Public Service Broadcasting Trust.
15. Detailed documentation and support work for CCAs in some states such as Nagaland and
Orissa have been initiated with organisations such as SACON and Vasundhara.
16. Much advocacy has been done by Kalpavriksh and other organisations on trying to get legal
and policy backing for CCAs, including:
• Inputs to the National Wildlife Action Plan and National Biodiversity Strategy and Action
Plan.
• Inclusion of a scheme to support and fund CCAs, in the 11th five year plan.
• Help in the implementation of the “Community Forestry” provision of the Scheduled Tribes
and Other Forest-Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006.
We look forward to any comments, additions, and corrections on this compilation. This will be
useful to us as also to the concerned communities.
(For more details on the above or for comments please contact Neema Pathak at Kalpavriksh or
at neema.pb@gmail.com)
Acronyms
ACF Assistant Forest Conservator of CPI Communist Party of India
Forests CPLR Common Property Land Resources
ACF Assistant Conservator Forests CPO Chakhesang Public Organisation
ADO Assistant Development Officer CPR Common Property Resources
AFPRO (UN) Action for Food Production CPR-EEC CPR Foundation Environment
AFR Anchal Forest Reserve Education Centre
AGS Alalli Gramabhivruddhi Samiti CRZ Coastal Regulation Zones
AGY Adarsh Gaon Yojana CS Case study
AIADMK All India Anna Dravida Munnetra CWLW Chief Wildlife Warden
Kazhagam DCF Deputy Conservator of Forests
AJCBMS Acharaya Jagdish Chandra Bose DDP Desert Development Programme
Briksha Mitra Sangha
DFO Divisional Forest Officer
APFDC Andhra Pradesh Forest Development
Corporation DHAN Development for Humane Action

APNGO Andhra Pradesh Non Government DLVS Dudhatoli Lok Vikas Sansthan
Organisations network DM District Magistrate
ATREE Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology DMK Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam
and the Environment
DPAP Drought Prone Area Development
BAIF Bharatiya Agro Industries Foundation Programme
BALCO Bharat Aluminium Company Limited DRS Dekh Rekh Samiti
BCCC Black Necked Crane Conservation DSC Development Support Centre
Committee
EDC Ecodevelopment Committees
BCPP Biodiversity Conservation
Prioritization Project EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

BDO Block Development Office ESRSPF Environmental Social Reformation

and Sangai Protection Forum
BGVS Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti
FA Forest Act 1927
BHS Biodiversity Heritage Sites
FCA Forest Conservation Act 1980
BMC Biodiversity Monitoring Committees
FD Forest Department
BNHS Bombay Natural History Society
FDA Forest Development Authority
BPL Below Poverty Line
FDC Forest Development Corporation
CAMEL Name of an NGO in Andhra Pradesh
FDCM Forest Development Corporation of
CAN Coastal Action Network Maharashtra
CARPAD Name of an NGO Iin Andhra Pradesh FES Foundation for Ecological Security
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity FPC Forest Protection Committee
CBO Community Based Organisation FPI Forest Panchayat Inspector
CCA Community Conserved Area FPI Forest Panchayat Inspector
CCT Continuous Contour Trench GB General Body
CDF Central Dairy Farm GCC Girijan Cooperative Corporation
CEC Centrally Empowered Committee GEC Gujarat Ecology Commission
CEE Centre for Environment Education GEF Global Environment Facility
CEESP Commission on Economic, GIB Great Indian Bustard
Environment and Social Policy
GMVN Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nigam
CFM Community Forest Management
GO Government Order
CFS Cooperative Forest Societies
GS Gram Sabha
CHIRAG Central Himalayan Rural Action
Group GSC Global Science Centre

CHS Conservation Hotspots GUIDE Gujarat Institute of Desert Ecology

CIDA Canadian International Development ha. Hectres

Agency HBS Himachal Bachao Samiti
CITES Convention on the International HGT Hunsur Gramabhivruddhi Trust
Trade of Endangered Species
HMI Himalayan Mountaineering Institute
CMFRI Central Marine Fisheries Institute
HR&CE Hindu Religious and Charitible
CMM Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha Endowment Trust

9
10

IBA Important Bird Area MLA Member of Legislative Assembly

IBCN Indian Birds Conservation Network MM Mahila Mandal
IDA International Development Agency MMD Mahila Mangal Dal
IFA Indian Forest Act 1927 MNC Mandar Nature Club
IIPA Indian Institute of Public MOEF/MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forests
Administration
MoU Memorandum of Understanding
IPNI International Plant Name Index
MPPFA Madras Preservation of Private
ITBP Indo Tibetan Border Police Forests Act 1949
IUCN International Union for the MPSP Madhya Pradesh Sericulture Project
Conservation of Nature or
MSL Mean Sea Level
International Conservation Union
MSSRF M.S. Swaminathan Research
IWDP Integrated Watershed Development
Foundation
Programme
MTE Makaibari Tea Estate
J&K Jammu and Kashmir
MTR Mid Term Review
JAC Joint Action Committee
NaRMG Natural Resource Management
JBC Joint Body Committee
Group
JFM Joint Forest Management
NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and
JFMC Joint Forest Management Action Plan
Committees
NCTPS North Chennai Thermal Power
JFPM Joint Forest Planning and Station
Management
NEAC National Environmental Awareness
JMM Joint Mangrove Management Campaign
JVUSM Jhanjharmata Vruksh Utpadan NEPED Nagaland Empowerment of People
Sahkari Mandli through Economic Development
KBP Kulhadi Bandh Panchayat NERCORMP- North Eastern Region Community
IFAD Resource Management Project for
KCC Kanchendzonga Conservation
Upland Areas-International Fund for
Committee
Agriculture Development
KFRI Kerala Forest Research Institute
NGO Non-government Organisation
KFD Karnataka Forest Department
NH National Highway
KI Knowledgeble Individual
NOC No Objection Certificate
KLNP Keibul Lamjao National Park
NREGS National Rural Employment
KNCTS Khonoma Nature Conservation and Guarantee Scheme
Tragopan Sanctuary
NRM Natural Resource Management
KNP Kanchendzonga National Park
NTCA National Tiger Conservation
KPFA Kerala Private Forests (Vesting & Authority
Assignment) Act 1971
NTFP Non Forest Timber Produce
KSTA Kerala Scheduled Tribes (Restriction
NWFP North West Frontier Province
of Transfer of Lands and Restoration
of Alienated lands) Act 1975 OBC Other Backward Classes
KWS Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary OFDC Orissa Forest Development
Corporation
LAMP Local Area Minor Forest Product Co-
operative Society OXFAM Name of an NGO
LC Local Communities PA Protected Area
LDA Loktak Development Authority PESA Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled
Areas) Act 1995
LHEP Loktak Hydroelectric project
PF Protected Forest
LPG Liquid Petroleum Gas
PFA People For Animals
LSU Local Student’s Union
PHC Primary Health Centres
LSWC Longwood Shola Watchdg Committee
PI People’s Institution
MAMSL Metres Above Mean Sea Level
PIL Public Interest Litigation
MAN Mysore Amateur Naturalist
POW Programme of Work
MASS Manipur Association for Science and
Society PPA People’s Protected Area
MB Managing Body PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
MF Minor Forest PRAKRITI Society for Promotion of Sustainable
Livelihoods from Nature
MFP Minor Forest Produce
 11

PWD Public Works Department VFR Village Forest Reserve

RAP Resettlement Action Plan VJFM Village Joint Forest Management
RCDC Regional Centre for Development VIKSAT Vikram Sarabhai Centre for
Cooperation Development Interaction
RD Revenue Department VLO Village Level Organisation
RF Reserved Forest VOYCE Vattakanal Organisation Youth
Community and Environment
RFO Range Forest Officer
VP Village Panchayat
RNP Ranthambor National Park
VRTI Vivekanand Rural Technology
RTR Ranthambor Tiger Reserve
Institution
SACON Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and
VSS Van Suraksha Samiti
Natural History
WANC Wildlife Aware Nature Club
SC Scheduled Caste
WCPA World Comission on Protected Areas
SD Sri Darshanam
WLPA Wild Life (Protection) Act
SDM Sub District Magistrate
WLS Wildlife Sanctuary
SG Sacred Grove
WP Writ Petition
SHG Self Help Group
WPC World Parks Congress
SMC Soil and Moisture Conservation
WTI Wildlife Trust of India
SPWD Society for Promotion of Wasteland
Development WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
SRISTI Society for Research and Initiatives YKGPVS Yashwant Krishi Gram and Panlot
for Sustainable Technologies and Vikas Sanstha
Institutions
YMD Yuvak Mangal Dal
SSD Society for Sustainable Development
ZSI Zoological Survey of India
ST Scheduled Tribe
TAP Tamil Nadu Afforestration
Programme
TBS Tarun Bharat Sangh
TDCC Tribal Development Corporation Ltd.
TFA Tank Farmers Association
TGCS Tree Growers Co-operative Society
TIDCO Tamil Nadu Industrial Development
Corporation
TILCEPA IUCN Strategic Direction on
Governance, Communities, Equity
and Livelihoods (TILCEPA) formerly
known as the Theme on Indigenous
and Local Communities, Equity, and
Protected Areas
TNADP Tamil Nadu Agricultural Development
Programme
TNEB Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
TSP Tribal Sub-Plan
TVC Toufema Village Council
UF Unclassed Forests or Unclassified
Government Forests
UNESCO United Nation’s Educational, Social
and Cultural Organisation
USF Unclassed State Forests
VC Village Council
VDB Village Development Board
VDC Village Development Council
VF Village Forest
VFC Village Forest Committee
VFP Village Forest Panchayat
VFPMC Village Forest Protection
Management Committee
 11. Gaddis – migratory pastorals
List of vernacular words
12. Ghee - fat produced from butter
Andhra Pradesh 13. Gram devta – village deity
1. Borke – degraded 14. Guru Granth Sahib – religious book of the Sikh
community
2. Chullah – local wood stove
15. Julahas - weaver
3. Gram sabhas – village councils
16. Kagjati - legal
4. Ijaras – traditional land title
17. Kardar - manager
5. Jagir – land belonging to the Jagirdar
18. Khel – possessed spirit
6. Jagirdar – representative of the Nizam who
controlled large tracts of land 19. Khewatdars – agricultural landowners
7. Katha – extract from Acacia catechu plant 20. Lambardar – local police officer
8. Mandal – sub-division of a district 21. Mali/devaan – a person possessed by spirits and
considered a divine messenger
9. Muttadar - hereditary local chief
22. Mauza - habitation
10. Panchayat - primary unit of administration under the
Panchayati Raj System of governance 23. Mohara – mental mask
11. Patta – legal land title 24. Pahari – belonging to the hills
12. Podu – slash and burn cultivation 25. Pattu – woolen shawl
Assam 26. Patwari – local land records officer
1. Gaon Bura – village elders 27. Patwari – local revenue officer
2. Hajira – daily wage labour 28. Pindi – image
3. Jhum – shifting cultivation 29. Pujari - priests
Chhattisgarh 30. Raja - king
1. Bahra - lowlands 31. Rakhas - watchmen
2. Biyasi – method of growing varieties of paddy by 32. Shamlat – village commons
broadcasting. Here farmers keep the seeds ready
for sowing just before the onset of the June rains 33. Sippy – scheduled caste

3. Chawar - midlands 34. Thatch - pastures

4. Chornia mandai - a festival among some tribal Jammu and Kashmir

communities in Bastar 1. Chitpa - fine
5. Corvee - crop tax system in Bastar 2. Gowa - an elected political head who acts as a
6. Darh – highlands custodian of all the rules and regulations

7. Devsari, dand, man, saribodi – traditional system 3. Gyatpo - assists gowa by solving disputes but the
of payment against use of forests by another village final decision in complex matters is reserved for the
within the boundaries of one gowa

8. Gram swaraj – village republic 4. Kootwal - assists gowa by deciding fines on any
deviation or breach
9. Kalajatha - cultural troupe
5. Lorapa - assists gowa by reporting defaulters
10. Mukhiya – head of the village
6. Pashmina - a kind of wool (cashmere)
11. Penda – making forest land into agricultural and by
burning off strips just before June Karnataka

12. Saribodi - offering 1. Bannada Kokkre Rakshana Samithi – a committee

to save painted storks
Himachal Pradesh
2. Bena - pasturelands
1. Annas – 1/8th of a rupee
3. Devarbana/ Nagabana – serpent groves
2. Bartan – right of use
4. Devarkan/ Devarkadu – sacred forest
3. Bhabbar – kind of grass which grows mainly in the
foothills and is used for making ropes 5. Dev-Thakka – head of religious activities

4. Chaur – a fan over Guru Granth Sahib 6. Gadde – rice fields

5. Chela – shaman/ interpreter 7. Gajnis – estuarine rice fields used for growing a salt
tolerant rice variety locally called kagga
6. Devis- goddess
8. Gorubale – scooping net
7. Devta - god
9. Gunagas/Kumbhars - potters
8. Dhup deep - incense
10. Guntha – 1/40th of an acre
9. Dohru – woolen shawl
11. Hakkal lands – shifting cultivation sites and fallows
10. Fuwals- seasonal graziers
12. Harijans – ‘untouchable’ caste

12
13. Kadu/Adavi – utility forests 16. Malgujari – A system established by the British
under which the state assigned land to a malgujar
14. Kans – forest to collect taxes from. The malgujar would give
15. Kharland - gajni land major part of these taxes to the state and keep the
rest for himself.
16. Kodi – natural drainage channels
17. Nas bandi – adopting family planning/ saying no to
17. Kumri/Hakkalu – sites of shifting cultivation large families
18. Kuyilugatti – sword 18. Nasha bandi – ban on alcohol and other addictives
19. Kuyilugatti system – rotating system of patrolling 19. nistar rights – customary rights
20. Maratha – warrior caste 20. Panchsutri – set of five principles
21. Panchayat – primary unit of administration under 21. Patwari – local revenue officer
the Panchayati Raj System of governance
22. Ryotwari – malguzari system
22. Soppinabetta/Betta – forests used to collect leaf
manure 23. Saranjamdari – malguzari system

23. Warg - taxes 24. Talathi – local land records officer

24. Wargdar – a privilege holder 25. Tekdi - hill

Kerala 26. Zilla Parishad- district courts

1. Adivasi – tribal communities Manipur

2. Brahmaswoms - temple trusts 1. Kangla Sha – embodiment of Sangai (brow-antlered

deer), which is the official emblem of the Manipur
3. Desam/ tara – the village or area inhabited by a government
particular community
2. Phumdi – thick floating biomass
4. Desavazhi - village head
3. Phum-namba- traditional fishery
5. Devaswoms – temple trusts
4. Upa pradhan - assistant to village head
6. Illam (Brahmin) – joint families of the highest caste
of Brahmins Meghalaya

7. Jemnis – landlords 1. Dalamariang – protect the earth

8. Kadai Kodathys – marine courts 2. Dolloi – a traditional administrative system in the

Khasi or Jainita Hills
9. Karanavars - priests
3. Durbar – village council
10. Kavus – sacred grove
4. Jhum – shifting cultivation
11. Kudiyans - tenants
5. Ka Khadduh – the youngest daughter
12. Naduvazh – ruler
6. Knia Ryngkew – the ritual of the tiger spirit
13. Pooja – religious ritual or prayer
7. Law iyngdog – sacred forest
14. Sarpam kavus – groves dedicated to snake gods
8. Law kyngtang – sacred forest
15. Tharavadu – clans who have descended from a
common ancestral mother 9. Law niam – sacred forest

Maharashtra 10. Lyngdoh – a traditional administrative system in the

Khasi or Jaintia Hills
1. Abhyas gats – informal study circle
11. Lyngdoh – priest
2. Adarsh gram nirman samiti – model village
development committee 12. Niam Tynrai – traditional customs

3. Beedi – locally made cigarettes 13. Ri Kynti – belonging to the clan or the individual

4. Bhagat – a person using supernatural and magical 14. Ri Raid – belonging to the community
practices to cure 15. Shad Suk Mynsiem – dance of the happy hearts
5. Bhajan gat – community religious singing group 16. Sirdar – a traditional administrative system in the
6. Bhukhanda – class ‘E’ forest or sparse scrub Khasi or Jaintia Hills

7. Charai bandi – ban on grazing in forests 17. Syiem – a traditional administrative system in the
Khasi or Jaintia Hills
8. Devrai – sacred groves
18. Syiem – traditional head of the Khasi state
9. Gaon gramrajya samiti – village self rule committee
19. U blei nongthew – God the creator
10. Jhadimandal – area of trees
20. Wahadadar – a traditional administrative system in
11. Kabaddi – a kind of game the Khasi or Jaintia Hills
12. Khadi – hand spun and woven with handloom cloth Nagaland
13. Kulhad bandi – ban on tree felling 1. Ching Woipa – village council
14. Mahila bachat gats – women’s self help group 2. Gaon Burra - village elder
15. Mahila gat – women’s group 3. Jhum – shifting cultivation
4. Khel - hamlet not commercial use
5. Morung – traditional dormitory where young men 10. Beeds – private lands protected by individuals for
are taught about culture, values, war techniques grass and fuelwood
and other traditions
11. Bhairav dev lok van abhayaranya - Bhairav dev
Orissa people’s sanctuary
1. Bandevta - jungle god 12. Bhajan – religious songs
2. Chatai - mat 13. Bighas – unit of measurement of land. In Rajasthan
1 bigha means 1.75 ha
3. Chullas – local wood stoves
14. Biswedar - princely land tenure system where the
4. Kardi - Bamboo shoots holder had a 20 year right over land
5. Kendu – tree whose leaves are used for making 15. Chabutara - platform
bidis (locally made cigarettes)
16. Charagah - pasturelands
6. Khapara – roof tiles
17. Daav – grass used for making ropes
7. Kharif – winter crop
18. Dang – hill
8. Khesara forests – forests under the revenue
department 19. Deepavali – festival of lamps, a religious festival of
the Hindus
9. Mantras - chants
20. Devasthans – sacred places
10. Padas – hamlets
21. Dhokoli – baskets
11. Palli - rotating system of patrolling
22. Ganga utthana- taking an oath of honesty in the
12. Sahi – hamlet name of Goddess Ganga
13. Sangha - group 23. Gochar – common grazing land
14. Taila - cultivation 24. Gram kosh – village fund
15. Tambi - approx 900 g of rice 25. Havaldar - army sergeant
16. Thenga - stick 26. Jagirdar – landlord
17. Thengapalli – a system of forest protection by 27. Johad - water harvesting structures
rotation where turn of the family is decided by
placing a stick outside their house 28. Kathwada - local wood godown
18. Vaidas - traditional healers 29. Kesar - saffron
19. Yuvak sangha – youth organisation 30. Kesar chhidakav - sprinkling of saffron
Punjab 31. Khos - terrain characterized by valleys and river
gorges
1. Banjar jadisd – short fallows
32. Kulharis - axes
2. Banjar kadim – long fallows
33. Lakheta – an island formed because of reservoir
3. Bar - upland ridges construction
4. Bela – lowland tracts 34. Oran – sacred patch of pastureland devoted to a
5. Chhambs – flood plains deity or a temple

6. Choes – seasonal rivulets 35. Paitham – catchment area

7. Gols – large herds 36. Pran pratishsta – a religious group

8. Kar seva - voluntary labour 37. Rabaries – migratory graziers

9. Phirmis - village 38. Roondhs – fodder reserves, grasslands in the

valleys/ plains
10. Rabi – summer crop
39. Shikargahs – royal hunting grounds
11. Shamlat deh - common land
40. Talab/talai - ponds
Rajasthan
Sikkim
1. Abadi – population
1. Chhang – local liquor (rice beer)
2. Amavasya – new moon
2. Chogyal – religious king
3. Arvari sansad – people’s parliament of the villages
in the Arvari river basin 3. Chyu-slo-nylso – an event to celebrate the blood-
brotherhood treaty of 1268 between the Lepcha
4. Baad - fencing and the Bhutia tribes of Sikkim
5. Bada - enclosure for animals 4. Dumza – a village organization including the heads
of all households
6. Balita - firewood
5. Gen-me - council
7. Bani - areas where trees were reserved for state
use 6. Goucharan – grazing lands
8. Barani - land that is not irrigated 7. Gumpa – monastery forests
9. Bazaar mukt fasal - crops grown for local use and 8. Gurudwara – Sikh temple
 15
9. Gyapen - assistants 34. Padi valai - a type of fishing net
10. Kazi – group of Sikkimese people considered to be 35. Panchayat - primary unit of administration under
wealthy landlords the Panchayati Raj System of governance
11. Khasmal – forests from where timber, fodder and 36. Pattanavars/Pattanathirs- tribal fishing community,
fuelwood needs could be gathered literally means ‘belonging to town’
12. Lhakhang – alter for offerings 37. Peramboke - wasteland
13. Mong Khyim – public hall where Dumzas hold 38. Sabhas – assemblies
meetings
39. Samudhayam - community ownership of land and
14. Pipen – normally a respected village elder (male) equitable sharing of its yield
Tamil Nadu 40. Sholas - patches of evergreen tropical rainforests in
the valleys of southern end of the Western Ghats,
1. Adappu – impoundment surrounded by natural grasslands
2. Alwars – saints 41. Silapadikaram – an epic poem
3. Ayacut - a measure of land irrigated 42. Sthala – holy place
4. Ayacutdars - farmers owning irrigated land 43. Sthala purana – scriptures related specific religious
5. Ayyanar - a terracotta figurine of a man astride a sites
horse deified as the village watchman 44. Sthalavriksha – holy tree
6. Cheruvu - tanks spread over the entire Deccan 45. Sutru valai – a type of fishing net
plateau and dating back at least 2000 years, in
Andhra Pradesh 46. Tadukku - a barricade in the path of the mobile
prawns
7. Cowle - document of rights
47. Talekattu - village level organization of fisherfolk
8. Deepavali – festival of lamps, a traditional Hindu
festival 48. Teertha – water source
9. Eeris - tanks spread over the entire Deccan plateau 49. Thirunandavan-kaingkarya –special grants from the
and dating back at least 2000 years king
10. Garba-girha – sanctum sactorum 50. Thirunandavanu-puram – temple gardens and
orchards
11. Gram sabha – village assembly
51. Thotam variayam – a committee that looks after
12. Kanmoi – tanks spread over the entire Deccan the village gardens
plateau and dating back at least 2000 years
52. Tillai - mangroves
13. Karnam – village accountant
53. Tinnai – administrative zones in Tamil Nadu
14. Keres – tanks spread over the entire Deccan
plateau and dating back at least 2000 years, in 54. Tiruvalangadu plates – a set of copper plates from
Karnataka the Chola period with inscriptions
15. Kovikaadagul – sacred grove 55. Vadakku paadu - a canal-shaped area of about
1.25 sq km on the northern side. This is the most
16. Kulam – lake productive area and therefore the most intense
17. Kuppams - settlements fishing is done here

18. Kurinji – hill regions 56. Valai - fishing nets

19. Kurinjipatta – mountain song 57. Vallikodi – lure fishing

20. Malaipadupakam – sound of the mountain 58. Veriyam – committees

21. Mara kaavagula – sacred grove 59. Yeri variyam – a community responsible for the
village lake or tank
22. Marudham – fields in riverine plains
Tripura
23. Moonthuri paadu - smallest and least productive
paadu and has almost been abandoned 1. Jhum – shifting cultivation

24. Nandavanam – temple with a garden 2. Mouja – a cluster of villages brought together for
administrative purposes
25. Nattupadagu – country boats
3. Tehsils – administrative sub-divisions of a district
26. Nattupadagu – country boats
Uttar Pradesh
27. Nedunalavadai – good, long north-wind
1. Ghat – riverside platforms
28. Neerkatti - one who irrigates water to the fields
2. Karmis – artisans involved in woodcraft
29. Neidhal – costal regions
3. Lakadhara – woodcutter community
30. Odai paadu - smallest and least productive paadu
and has almost been abandoned 4. Parganas – present day talukas (administrative
units within a district)
31. Paadu - a traditional system of fishing, where a part
of the lagoon is controlled and earmarked for the 5. Tari – sap obtained from sapping
exclusive fishing use of designated villages 6. Usar – slippery soil that exists in Gusikaran forests
32. Paalai - wasteland Uttarakhand
33. Paddu – traditional system of farming 1. Adhiveshan - gathering
16
2. Assi Saal – 80 years 44. Lath panchayat- traditional system of forest
protection, where members take turn to patrol the
3. Assi Saal Bandobast – first land settlement carried forest.
out in Uttarakhand in 1823 (year 80 according to
the Hindu calendar) 45. Maharaja - emperor
4. Azad panchayat – independent village council 46. Mahila ban – patches of forests being managed by
women
5. Banali/banai – habitat of oak trees
47. Mahila mangal dal- village women’s association
6. Baranaja – growing 12 or more crops together in
one field to increase productivity 48. Maiti andolan – association of unmarried girls
7. Bari/patta system – a system where families take 49. Mela – festival
turns at protecting the forest
50. Naap – measured/ demarcated
8. Bazaar- market place
51. Nali – 1/20th of an acre
9. Beeja Bachao Andolan – Save the Seeds Movement
52. Nali system – system of paying guards in kind
10. Benaap- unmeasured/undemarcated
53. Nyay panchayat – village legal council
11. Bhabbar – kind of local grass largely grows in the
Himalayan foothills 54. Pahari – belonging to the hills

12. Bugyaals – high altitude pasture lands 55. Panchayat – primary unit of administration under
the Panchayati Raj System of governance
13. Chaukidari system – hiring guards to protect the
forests 56. Panchayat bhawan – community hall

14. Chaumasa- monsoon months 57. Panchayat ghar –hall where the panchayat conducts
its meetings
15. Chhaans – cattle sheds
58. Panches - village elders who act as a traditional
16. Chipko – to cling judiciary body
17. Chooran – digestives 59. Paryavaran – environment
18. Chowkidaar- guards 60. Pataal – flat roofing slates
19. Daliyon ka dagda – friends of the trees 61. Patti – cluster of villages
20. Danda ki jatir - procession to the hilltop temple 62. Ped kaato andolan – cut the trees movement
where a puja is performed
63. Pradhan – village head
21. Dari - rug
64. Pramukh – village head
22. Dev bhoomi – abode of the gods
65. Puja – religious ritual/ prayer
23. Dev van – sacred groves
66. Raja - king
24. Devta - deity
67. Rauli - ravine
25. Dhandaak – traditional protest
68. Riyasat – princely states
26. Dharna - demonstration
69. Sanjaiti – village protection practices of communal
27. Dhol - drum land conservation
28. Doli – palanquin 70. Sarpanch – panchayat head
29. Durbar – king’s court 71. Shloka/Mantra - chants
30. Ghaas ki maang – community grassland plots 72. Shramdan – voluntary labour
allocated for harvesting to families in a village as
per village consensus 73. Soyam forest – forest lands under civil
administration (revenue department)
31. Gobar gas - biogas
74. Tankha – cash wage system
32. Gram sabha – village assembly
75. Thaplas – terrace land
33. Gule – small canal
76. Thekedar - superviser
34. Haq haquque – rights (here with reference to
timber rights) 77. Toks - hamlets

35. Isht devta – family deity 78. Vajra - thunderbolt

36. Jangli - wild 79. Van panchayat – forest council

37. Jhapto cheeno andolan – snatch and grab 80. Van samitis – forest councils
movement 81. Yatra - journey
38. Joharhs/ Pokhars – ponds or pools 82. Yuvak- youth
39. Karyakarani samiti – executive committee
40. Khala- stream West Bengal
41. Kharak/Marore - pastures 1. Baisakh – spring (season)
42. Kokat – low quality timber 2. Bandevta – deity of the forest
43. Lath - stick
 17
3. Banjhakri – an evil spirit 38. Kawdi - jowar (sorgham) stalk, valued as cattle
food
4. Beel - wetland
39. Kebangs - traditional village councils among the
5. Charlands – waterlogged land formed after floods Adi Gallong tribe in Arunachal
6. Jheel – pond 40. Khaat - wooden cot
7. Mithai - sweet 41. Khalsa - state land during princely times
8. Sindhur – vermillion 42. Khatedari – private agricultural land
Miscellaneous 43. Kosh - fund
1. Adarsh Gaon Yojana – model village scheme 44. Koshadhyaksh- – treasurer
2. Adhyaksha - president 45. Koul – order
3. Akharas – wrestling grounds 46. Lok abhyaranya – people’s wildlife sanctuary
4. Bagad - a ritual representing human sacrifice 47. Maadi - a fermented local drink made from the sap
5. Bagicha - garden of Caryota palm

6. Bak - bakkookki lakri - free grant timber 48. Maalkari - cult of devotees who refrain from a non-
vegetarian diet
7. Bandh van - closed forest
49. Mahwat - winter showers
8. Barah gaon ki panchayat – executive committee of
12 villages 50. Maidan - open field

9. Begar - free labour 51. Makarsankranti - a Hindu festival

10. Chahi - irrigated land 52. Matsya union – union of fisherfolk

11. Chaitra purnima - fullmoon day on the first month 53. Mithun - semi-domesticated cattle
of the Hindu calendar, approximately April 54. Nabhovani shetkari mandal - a farmers’ collective
12. Chappati - type of bread 55. Nadi - stream
13. Chara - fodder 56. Padyatra - a march on foot
14. Charagah - pasture land 57. Pani panchayat - water council
15. Chaulai - basket 58. Patel - village headman
16. Chhatra Yuva Sangharsh Vahini – youth social 59. Patta – leaves
movement
60. Pattal - leaf plates
17. Dalit – the repressed castes (usually all scheduled
castes are referred by this term) 61. Peeda, hal and huri - stool
18. Datli - sickle 62. Peewat - irrigated land
19. Dauna - leaf bowls 63. Pula - bundle of grass
20. Deorai – sacred grove 64. Purdah - veil/custom where women cover their
faces around men/elders
21. Dhandha - cattle
65. Raab – a system of agriculture in which before
22. Dhani - hamlet planting paddy, branches of trees, along with cow-
23. Firwal - forest guard dung are burnt in the field.

24. Galeecha - carpet 66. Rakhi – tying a thread on someone as a promise to

protect them
25. Galkari - a person who is supposed to have
supernatural powers 67. Roondh - state owned grasslands during princely
times
26. Gaon Ganraajya - village self-rule
68. Saag - vegetable
27. Garud - eagle, a bird that helped lord Rama in the
Hindu epic Ramayan 69. Satyagraha - non-violent movement

28. Gauna - ceremony marking the coming of the bride 70. Sawai chak – unused land under the forest
to the husband’s houses department

29. Gochar – grazing land 71. Shikar - hunting

30. Gotra - distinct clans within Hindu religion 72. Shikari - hunter

31. Hanka - hunting preserve during the princely state 73. Shikarkhana – royal hunting reserves

32. Holi - festival of colours normally in the month of 74. Sonchirri - mythical golden bird
March 75. Tendu leaves – leaves used for making bidis
33. Jal - water 76. Tilak - application of vermillion on the forehead
34. Jau - kind of millet 77. Urus – annual village festival in Maharashtra
35. Kaathi - head load of firewood 78. Waghjai – the tiger goddess
36. Karb- fodder derived from the jowar crop
37. Kastgaar - cultivator
List of species mentioned in the directory
Andhra Pradesh Danim (Punica granatum)
Birds Date-palm tree (Phoenix dactylifera)
Adjutant storks (Leptoptilos sp.) Delonix elata
Asian open-billed storks (Anastomus oscitans) East Indian satinwood (Chloroxylon swietenia)
Black ibis (Pseudibis papillosa) Ganuga (Pongamia pinnata)
Black-headed ibis (Threskiornis melanocephalus) Gotti (Ziziphus xylocarpus)
Cormorant (Phalacrocorax sp.) Gum karaya (Sterculia urens)
Garganeys (Anas querquedula) Harda , Myrobalan (Terminalia chebula)
Glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus) Jaam (Psidium guajava)
Great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo) Jamun (Syzygium cumini)
Grey heron (Ardea cinerea) Jeedi or bilawa (Semecarpus anacardium)
Grey junglefowl (Gallus sonneratii) Karanj (Pongamia pinnata)
Indian cormorant (Phalacrocorax fuscicollis) Katha (Acacia catechu)
Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus) Kaweet (Feronia limonia)
Jerdon’s courser (Rhinoptilus bitorquatus) Korintha (Pterolobium indicum) (scientific name could
not be verified)
Northern pintails (Anas acuta)
Lantana (Lantana camara)
Northern shovellers (Anas clypeata)
Mahua (Madhuca longifolia)
Open-billed stork (Anastomus oscitans)
Nalla tumma (Acacia leucophloea)
Painted storks (Mycteria leucocephala)
Nallamanu (scientific name could not be ascertained)
Partridges (Galloperdix sp.)
Narlingi (Albizia amara)
Pelicans (Pelacanus sp.)
Neem (Azadirachta indica)
Quails (Coturnix sp.)
Palaguidisa (scientific name could not be ascertained)
Snipes (Gallinago sp.)
Pedda manu (Ailanthus excelsa)
Spotbill duck (Anas poecilorhyncha)
Pipal (Ficus religiosa)
Teals (Anas sp.)
Rai (Ficus religiosa)
Animals
Rela (Cassia fistula)
Blackbuck (Antilope cervicarpa)
Rohi (Ficus benghalensis)
Chinkara (Gazella bennettii)
Sandra (scientific name could not be ascertained)
Four-horned antelope (Tetracerus quadricornis)
Sarkaritumma (Prosopis juliflora)
Indian wolf (Canis lupus)
Shirish (Albizzia lebbeck)
Jackal (Canis aureus)
Shisum (Dalbergia latifolia)
Jungle cat (Felis chaus)
Sitaphal (Annona squamosa)
Hanuman langur (Semnopithecus entellus)
Sopera (Dalbergia paniculata)
Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Sundra (Acacia sundra)
Macaque (Macaca radiata)
Tamarind/chinta (Tamarindus indicus)
Mycteria leucocephala (common name could not be
ascertained) Teak (Tectona grandis)
Sambar (Cervus unicolor) Tella tumma (Acacia modesta)
Sloth bear (Melursus ursinus) Tellamaddi (Terminalia arjuna)
Spotted deer (Axis axis) Tendu (Diospyros melanoxylon)
Tiger (Panthera tigris) Thangedu (scientific name could not be ascertained)
Wild boar (Sus scrofa) Thunki (scientific name could not be ascertained)
Plants Usirr or amla (Embelica officinalis)
Raktachandan (Pterocarpus santalinus) Visha mushti (Strychnos nux-vomica)
Anjana (Hardwickia binata) White gulmohar (Delonix elata)
Ashwagandha (Withania somnifera) Yapa (Azadirachta indica)
Axlewood (Anogeissus latifolia) Yon (Anogeissus latifolia)
Bamboo (Dendrocalamus strictus)
Banyan (Ficus benghalensis) Arunachal Pradesh
Bel fruit (Aegle marmelos) Birds
Billagodisa (could not be ascertained) Hyptianthera stricta (common name could not be
ascertained)
Bitluga (could not be ascertained)
Bengal florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis)
Chilla ginjalu (Strychnos potatorum)
Black-necked crane (Grus nigricollis)
Chironji (Buchnania lanzan)

18
 19
White-winged wood duck (Cairina scutulata) Ferns (Pteridophytes)
Mishmi wren/ rusty-throated wren warbler (Spelaeornis Himalayan white pine (Pinus wallichiana)
badeigularis)
Hirda (Terminalia chebula)
Sclater’s monal (Lopophorus sclateri)
Japanese bamboo (Phyllostachys bambusoides)
Temminck’s tragopan (Tragopan temminckii)
Kanak Champa (Pterospermum acerifolium)
Animals
Magnolia pterocarpa (common name could not be
Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) ascertained)
Assamese macaque (Macaca assamensis) Rawami (Dendrocalamus sikkimensis)
Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak) Red silk cotton (Bombax ceiba)
Capped langur (Trachypithecus pileatus) Rhododendron arunachalense (common name could not
Clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa) be ascertained)
Common civet (unclear which species) Rhododendron dalhousieae (common name could not be
ascertained)
Common palm civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus)
Sal (Shorea robusta)
Gaur (Bos gaurus)
Siriasing (Altingia excelsa)
Golden cat (Catopuma temmincki)
Tetracentron sinense (common name could not be
Goral (Naemorhedus goral) ascertained)
Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata)
Hispid hare (Caprolagus hispidus) Assam
Hog deer (Axis porcinus) Birds
Hoolock gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock) Black baza (Aviceda leuphotes)
Indian elephant (Elephas maximus) Black eagle (Ictinaetus malayensis)
Indian wild boar / wild pig (Sus scrofa) Eurasian eagle owl (Bubo bubo)
Jackal (Canis aureus) Great pied hornbill/ Great hornbill (Buceros bicornis)
Large Indian civet (Viverra zibetha) Oriental pied hornbill (Anthracoceros albirostris)
Leopard (Panthera pardus) Osprey (Pandion haliaetus)
Leopard cat (Prionailurus bengalensis) Animals
Spotted linsang (Prionodon pardicolor) Asian leaf turtle (Cyclemys dentata)
Mainland serow (Naemorhedus sumatrensis) Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak)
Marbled cat (Pardofelis marmorata) Bear (unclear which species)
Mithun (Bos frontalis) Chinese pangolin (Manis pentadactyla)
Mongooses (Herpestes sp.) Civet (unclear which species)
Musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) Clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa)
Pig-tailed macaque (Macaca leonina) Common Indian monitor/Monitor lizard (Varanus
Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) bengalenis)
Sambar (Cervus unicolor) Crab-eating mongoose (Herpestes urva)
Shrews (unclear which species) Deer (unclear which species)
Slow loris (Nycticebus bengalensis) Red giant flying squirrel (Petaurista petaurista)
Snow leopard (Uncia uncia) Fox (Vulpes bengalensis)
Spotted linsang (Prionodon pardicolor) Gaur (Bos gaurus)
Stumped-tailed macaque (Macaca arctoides) Golden langur (Trachypithecus geei)
Tak (Budorcas taxicolor) Indian Pangolin (Manis crassicaudata)
Taro (Colocasia esculenta) Indian porcupine (Hystrix indica)
Tiger (Panthera tigris) King cobra (Ophiophagus hannah)
Wild buffalo (Bubalus arnee) Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Wild dog (Cuon alpinus) Leopard cat (Prionailurus bengalensis)
Plants Squirrels (unclear which species)
Amari (Amoora wallichii) Tiger (Panthera tigris)
Amentotaxus assamica (common name could not be Water monitor (Varanus salvator)
ascertained) Wild boar/Wild pig (Sus scrofa)
Bamboo (Phyllostachys assamica) Plants
Blue pine (Pinus longifolia) Bhelu (Tetrameles nudiflora)
Chaplash (Artocarpus chaplasha) Jam (Eugenia jambolana)
Cleisostoma williamsonii (common name could not be Jarmony bon (Chromolaena odorata)
ascertained)
Koroi (Albizia lebbeck)
Screw-pine (Pandanus furcatus)
Kum (Strobilanthes flaccidifolius)
Dhale Katus (Castanopsis indica)
Lajukilata (Mimosa pudica)
East Indian almond (Terminalia myriocarpa)
Phulgamari (could not be ascertained)
20
Poma (Cedrela toona) Sag (Tectona grandis)
Sal (Shorea robusta) Sal (Shorea robusta)
Sida sp. (common name could not be ascertained) Sanjha (Terminalia alata = Terminalia tomentosa)
Simul (Bombax ceiba) Semur (Bombax ceiba)
Sonaru (Cassia fistula) Tendu (Diospyros melanoxylon)
Umbar (Ficus racemosa)
Bihar
Birds Gujarat
Asian openbill/ open-billed stork (Anatomas oscitans) Birds
Black stork (Ciconia nigra) Bulbul (Unclear which species)
Black-necked stork (Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus) Common crane (Grus grus)
Greater adjutant stork (Leptoptilos dubius) Great Indian Bustard (Ardeotis nigriceps)
Lesser adjutant (Leptoptilos javanicus) Grey hypocolius (Hypocolius ampelinus)
Oriental stork (Ciconia boyciana) Lesser florican (Sypheotides indica)
Painted stork (Mycteria leucocephala) Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus)
White stork (Ciconia ciconia) Red spurfowl (Galloperdix spadicea)
Woolly-necked stork or white-necked stork (Ciconia Animals
episcopus) Black buck (Antilope cervicapra)
Animals Blue bull (Boselaphus tragocamelus)
Four-horned antelope (Tetracerus quadricornis) Chinkara (Gazella bennettii)
Gangetic dolphin (Platanista gangetica) Four-horned antelope (Tetracerus quadricornis)
Hog deer (Axis porcinus) Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Gaur (Bos gaurus) Lion (Panthera leo)
Indian elephant (Elephas maximus) Wild ass (Equus onager)
Leopard (Panthera pardus) Plants
Swamp deer (Cervus duvaucelii) Acacia senegal (common name could not be
Tiger (Panthera tigris) ascertained)
Wild buffalo (Bubalus arnee) Aduso, adathoda (Adhatoda vasica)
Plants Amli (Tamarindus indica)
Banyan (Ficus benghalensis) Apluda mutica (common name could not be
ascertained)
Khair (Acacia catechu)
Arjun (Terminalia arjuna)
Mango (Mangifera indica)
Asopalav (Polyalthia longifolia)
Peepal (Ficus religiosa)
Avicennia alba (common name could not be
Sal (Shorea robusta) ascertained)
Semal (Bombax ceiba) Avicennia officinalis (common name could not be
Shisam (Dalbergia latifolia) ascertained)
Toona (Cedrela toona) Barleria cristata (common name could not be
ascertained)
Bauhinia racemosa (common name could not be
Chhattisgarh ascertained)
Plants Ber (Ziziphus mauritiana)
Amla (Emblica officinalis) Bhangra (Eclipta prostrata)
Banyan (Ficus benghalensis) Bilva (Aegle marmelos)
Behara (Terminalia bellerica) Brahmi (Centella asiatica)
Bel (Aegle marmelos) Calotropis procera (common name could not be
Harra (Terminalia chebula) ascertained)
Khadsingi (could not be ascertained) Capparis deciduas (common name could not be
ascertained)
Kodon (Paspalum scrobiculatum)
Kutki (a kind of millet) Cassia tora (common name could not be ascertained)
Mahua (Madhuca longifolia) Cenchrus ciliaris (common name could not be
ascertained)
Acacia (species not clear)
Chitrak or chitaro (Plumbago zeylanica)
Tamarind (Tamarindus indica)
Chloris sp. (common name could not be ascertained)
Cashew (Anacardium occidentale)
Chrysopogon sp. (common name could not be
Mango (Mangifera indica)
ascertained)
Mulberry (Morus serrata)
Chrysopogon fulvus (common name could not be
Palas (Butea monosperma) ascertained)
Peepal (Ficus religiosa) Corchorus sp. (common name could not be ascertained)
 21
Cressa sp. (common name could not be ascertained) Sesbania sp. (common name could not be ascertained)
Crotolaria sp. (common name could not be ascertained) Sporobolus marginatus (common name could not be
ascertained)
Cymbopogon jwarancusa (common name could not be
ascertained) Striga asiatica (common name could not be
ascertained)
Cymbopogon martini (common name could not be
ascertained) Sueda nudiflora (common name could not be
ascertained)
Cynodon dactylon (Doob grass)
Tridax procumbens (common name could not be
Cyperus rotundus (common name could not be ascertained)
ascertained)
Umbaro (Ficus racemosa)
Dactyloctenium (species could not be ascertained)
Vad (Ficus benghalensis)
Dav (Anogeissus latifolia)
Wild jasmine (Jasminum sp.)
Deshi baval (Acacia nilotica)
Xanthium strumarium (common name could not be
Desi acasia (Acacia nilotica) ascertained)
Desmodium diffusum (common name could not be
ascertained)
Himachal Pradesh
Desmostachya sp. (common name could not be
ascertained) Animals
Dichanthium annulatum (common name could not be Barking Deer (Muntiacus muntjak)
ascertained) Wild boar/ Wild pig (Sus scrofa)
Digera muricata (common name could not be Jackal (Canis aureus)
ascertained)
Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Dudhi (Wrightia tinctoria)
Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus)
Echinocloa sp. (common name could not be
ascertained) Plants
Feronia limonia (Elephant Apple) Bhabbar (Eulaliopsis binata)
Gandabaval (Prosopis juliflora) Khair (Acacia catechu)
Hardwickia binata (common name could not be Pansara (Wendlandia heynei syn. W. exsertap)
ascertained) Sisoo (Dalbergia sissoo)
Helicteres isora (common name could not be
ascertained)
Jammu and Kashmir
Heteropogon contortus (common name could not be
ascertained) Birds
Bar-headed goose (Anser indicus)
Indigofera sp. (common name could not be ascertained)
Black-necked crane (Grus nigricollis)
Jamun (Syzygium cumini)
Animals
Kadaya (Sterculia urens)
Blue sheep (Pseudois nayaur)
Kanaji (Holoptelea integrifolia)
Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx)
Kanther (Carissa conjesta)
Himalayan brown bear (Ursus arctos)
Kanthera (Capparis sepiaria)
Himalayan mouse hare (could not be ascertained)
Karanj (Pongamia pinnata)
Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata)
Kevda (Pandanus sp)
Himalayan tahr (Hemitragus jemlahicus)
Khajoor (Phoenix dactylifera)
Himalayan/ Asiatic black bear/ bhaloo (Ursus thibetanus
Khakra (Butea monosperma) = Selenarctos thibetanus)
Khijado (Prosopis cineraria) Ibex (Capra ibex)
Leucas aspera (common name could not be Kashmir red deer/ hangul (Cervus elaphus)
ascertained)
Kiang/ Tibetan wild ass (Equus kiang)
Mango (Mangifera indica)
Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Musli (Curculigo orchioides)
Markhor (Capra falconeri)
Naleri (Cocos nucifera)
Marmot (unclear which species)
Neem (Azadirachta indica)
Musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster)
Negod (Vitex negundo)
Red fox (Vulpes vulpes)
Onkhlo (Alangium salvifolium)
Snow leopard (Uncia uncia)
Opuntia sp. (common name could not be ascertained)
Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii)
Piludi (Salvadora oleoides)
Tibetan argali (Ovis ammon)
Pipal/papal (Ficus religiosa)
Tibetan gazelle (Procapra picticaudata)
Rhizophora (Avicennia marina)
Yak (Bos grunniens)
Salvadora sp. (common name could not be ascertained) Jackal (Canis aureus)
Sandal (Santalum album) Plants
Sehima nervosum (common name could not be Bol (Commiphora myrrha)
ascertained)
Burtze (fodder sp.; scientific name could not be
22
ascertained) Slender loris (Loris lyddekerianus)
Caragana (fodder sp.; scientific name could not be Wild boar / wild pig (Sus scrofa)
ascertained)
Plants
Gyapshen (fodder sp.; scientific name could not be
ascertained) Agnishikha (Gloriosa superba)
Longma (fodder sp.; scientific name could not be Andamurugila (Carallia brachiata)
ascertained)
Angeli (Artocarpus hirsuta)
Nyalo (fodder sp.; scientific name could not be
ascertained) Aradala or Murinahuli (Garcinia morella)
Shyot (fodder sp.; scientific name could not be Areca nut (Areca catechu)
ascertained) Australian acacia (Acacia auriculiformis)
Babul (Acacia nilotica)
Karnataka Bamboo (Bambusa sp)
Birds Banyan (Ficus benghalensis)
Bee eaters (Merops spp.) Bokalu (Mimusops elengi)
Common teal (Anas crecca) Canes (Calamus spp.)
Coppersmith barbet (Megalaima haemacephala) Cardamom (Elettaria cardamomum)
Cuckoo (Cuculus sp.) Cashew trees (Anacardium occidentale)
Drongos (Dicrurus sp.) Casuarina (Casuarina equisetifolia)
Eastern redshank (cscientific name ould not be Coconut palms (Cocos nucifera)
ascertained)
Dalchini (Cinnamomum zeylanicum)
Greater spotted eagle (Aquila clanga)
Dhupa (Vateria indica)
Grey heron (Ardea cinerea)
Dipterocarpus indicus (common name coud not be
Grey plover (Pluvialis squatarola) ascertained)
Herons (Ardea sp.) Fishtail palm (Caryota urens)
Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus) Garcinia (Garcinia gummi-gutta)
Jungle fowl (Gallus sp) Gojjalu (Lannea coromandelica)
Kentish plover (Charadrius alexandrinus) Gular or Atthi (Ficus racemosa)
Kingfishers (Unclear which species) Halchary (Memecylon umbellatum)
Kites (Milvus sp.) Heddi (Adina cordifolia)
Lesser sand plover (Charadrius mongolus) Honagalu (Terminalia paniculata)
Little grebe (Tachybaptus ruficollis) Honne (Pterocarpus marsupium)
Marsh sandpiper (Tringa stagnatilis) Hunal (Terminalia paniculata)
Night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) Ipati (Avicennia officinalis)
Oriole (Oriolus sp.) Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus)
Painted stork (Mycteria leucocephala) Jambe (Xylia xylocarpa)
Pied avocet (Recurvirostra avosetta) Jamun (Syzygium cumini)
Purple moorhen /purple swamphen (Porphyrio Kandale (Kandelia candel)
porphyrio)
Kavala (Careya arborea)
Red-wattled lapwing (Vanellus indicus)
Kokum (Garcinia indica)
Rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri)
Mango (Mangifera indica)
Rosy starling (Sturnus roseus)
Matti (Terminalia tomentosa)
Ruddy shelduck (Tadorna ferruginea)
Mother-in-law’s tongue (Albizia lebbeck)
Spot-billed pelican (Pelecanus philippensis)
Spotted dove (Streptopelia chinensis) Myristica fatua (common name coud not be ascertained)

Tree-pie (Dendrocitta sp.) Myrobalan (Terminalia chebula)

Whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus) Nandi (Lagerstroemia lanceolata/ Lagerstroemia

microcarpa)
Whiskered tern (Chlidonias hybridus) Neeilu (Syzygium cumini)
White Ibis (Threskiornis aethiopica) Neem (Azadirachta indica)
White-throated fantail (Rhipidura albicollis) Phoenix (Phoenix sylvestris)
Animals Pinanga dicksonii (common name coud not be
Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak) ascertained)
Black-naped hare (Lepus nigricollis) Pipal (Ficus religiosa)
Asian Elephant (Elephas maximus) Poon (Calophyllum tomentosum)
European golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria) Portia (Thespesia populnea)
Hanuman langur (Semnopithecus entellus) Raagi (Eleusine coracana)
Hyena (Hyena hyena) Rain tree (Samanea saman)
Jackal (Canis aureus) Rattan canes (Calamus sp.)
Mahaseer (Tor putitora) Reeds (Ochlandra sp.)
 23
Roja Gida (Lantana camara) Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta)
Rosewood (Dalbergia latifolia) Sambar (Cervus unicolor)
Sandalwood (Santalum album) Slender loris (Loris lyddekerianus)
Satavari (Asparagus racemosus) Sloth bear (Melursus ursinus)
Soapnut (Sapindus laurifolius) Spotted deer (Axis axis)
Surugi (Mammea suriga) Striped hyena (Hyaena hyaena)
Tamarind (Tamarindus indica) Tiger (Panthera tigris)
Teak (Tectona grandis) Wild boar/ Wild pig (Sus scrofa)
Uppage (Garcinia gummi-gutta) Wild cat (Felis chaus)
Wild date palm (Phoenix sylvestris) Wild dogs or dhole (Cuon alpinus)
Plants
Kerala Ain (Terminalia tomentosa)
Animals Alu (Meyna laxiflora)
Bonnet macaques (Macaca radiata) Amla (Emblica officinalis )
Jackal (Canis aureus) Anjan (Hardwickia binata)
Olive Ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) Asana/ Agan (Bridelia retusa)
Plants Babul (Acacia nilotica)
Alexandrian laurel (Calophyllum inophyllum) Bahawa (Cassia fistula)
Eeyachembu (Plumeria sp.) Bamboo (Dendrocalamus strictus)
Dioclea sp. (common name coud not be ascertained) Beheda (Terminalia bellerica)
Diospyros buxifolia (common name coud not be Bel (Aegle marmelos)
ascertained)
Bhendi (Thespesia populnea )
Nandi (Lagerstroemia parviflora)
Bhutya/ Bhutyakes (Elaeodendron glaucum)
Shisam (Dalbergia latifolia)
Biba (Semecarpus anacardium)
White silk-cotton (Ceiba pentadra)
Bija (Pterocarpus marsupiam )
Wrightia sp. (common name coud not be ascertained)
Charoli (Buchanania cochinchinensis)
Chinchawa (Albizia odoratissima)
Maharashtra Devakhumba (Leucas cephalotes)
Birds Dhaoda/ dhawada (Anogeissus latifolia)
Crane (Grus sp.) Dikemali (Gardenia resinifera)
Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus) Fish-tail palm/ Birli Maad (Caryota urens)
Quails (unclear which species) Garbi (Entada pusaetha)
Animals Ghaypaat (Agave americana)
Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak) Hirda (Terminalia chebula)
Blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra) Jambhul (Syzygium cumini)
Black-naped hare (Lepus nigricollis) Kadu karanda (Dioscorea bulbifera)
Chinkara/Indian gazelle (Gazella bennettii) Kalam (Mitragyna parvifolia)
Cheetal or spotted deer (Axis axis) Karanj (Pongamia pinnata)
Chousinga / Four-horned antelope (Tetracerus Karvi (Carvia callosa)
quadricornis)
Karwand (Carissa congesta)
Common Indian grey mongoose (Herpestes edwardsi)
Kate sawar (Bombax ceiba)
Fox (Vulpes bengalensis)
Katranji (Bambusa arundinacea)
Gaur (Bos gaurus)
Khair (Acacia catechu)
Giant squirrel (Ratufa indica centralis)
Kombal (Gnetum ula)
Hanuman langur (Semnopithecus entellus)
Korfad (Aloe vera or Aloe barbadensis)
Indian porcupine (Hystrix indica)
Kuda (Holarrhena pubescens)
Indian rock Python (Python molurus molurus)
Kumbha (Careya arborea)
Indian wolf (Canis lupus)
Mahua (Madhuca longifolia)
Jackal (Canis aureus)
Mango (Mangifera indica)
Jungle cat (Felis chaus)
Moha or Mahua (Madhuca longifolia)
Leopard cat (Prionailurus bengalensis)
Moin/Shemat (Lannea coromandelica/Odina woodier)
Leopard/ panther (Panthera pardus)
Nana (Lagerstroemia microcarpa)
Malabar giant squirrel/Indian giant squirrel (Ratufa
indica elphinstonii ) Narkya/Amruta (Nothapodytes nimmoniana= Mappia
foetida)
Monitor lizard /Common Indian monitor (Varanus
bengalenis) Neem or kadulimb (Azadirachta indica)
Monkeys (Macaca sp.) Nilgiri (Eucalyptus sp.)
Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus)
24
Palas (Butea monosperma) Moirang sathibi macha /Small Indian civet (Viverricula
Pangara (Erythrina indica) indica)

Pangara (Erythrina suberosa) Porcupines (Hystrix sp.)

Sanamba (common otter) could not ascertain whether
Pisa (Actinodaphne hookeri)
the smooth coated otter (Lutrogale perspicillata) or
Ragi (Eleusine coracana) Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra)
Rohan/ shendri (Mallotus philippensis) Sangai /brow-antlered deer (Cervus eldii)
Saag (Tectona grandis) Slow loris (Nycticebus bengalensis)
Sahu (Salix tetrasperma) Spotted linsang (Prionodon pardicolor)
Saja (Terminalia tomentosa) Tiger (Panthera tigris)
Sehma (scientific name could not be ascertained) Plants
Sesam/Shisam (Dalbergia latifolia) Alder (Alnus nepalensis)
Shendvel (Dioscorea pentaphylla) Bonsum (Phoebe henesiana) (scientific name could not
Shikekai (Acacia concinna) be verified)
Shiwan or gambhari (Gmelina arborea) Cane (Calamus sp.)
Suru (Casuarina equisetifolia) Cardamom (Elattaria cardamomum)
Tamarind (Tamarindus indica) Champaca (Michelia champaca)
Tambat (Flacourtia indica) Choura (Leersia hexandra)
Teak or saag (Tectona grandis) Coffee (Coffea sp.)
Tendia (Lagerstroemia parviflora) Ishing charang (Hydrilla verticillata)
Tendu (Diospyros melanoxylon) Kabo-kang/water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes)
Tiwas (Ougeinia oojeinensis) Kabo-napi (Alternanthera philoxeroides)
Watoli/ Watvel/Ramrukhi vel (Diploclisia glaucescens) Oak (Quercus sp.)
Wawla (Holoptelea integrifolia) Pine (Pinus sp.)
Rubber (Hevea brasiliensis)
Manipur Siroy lily (Lilium chitrangadae)
Birds Singmut (Erianthus arundinaceus)
Blyth’s tragopan (Tragopan blythi) Singnang (Erianthus procerus)
Iruppi /ferruginous pochard (Aythya nyroca) Taxus baccata (common name could not be
ascertained)
Meitunga/northern pintail (Anas acuta)
Tea (Camellia sinensis)
Mrs Hume’s bar-backed pheasant (Syrmaticus humiae)
Teak (Tectona grandis)
Nganu khara /northern shoveller (Anas clypeata)
Tou (Phragmites karka)
Nganu pirel / spotbilled duck (Anas poecilorhyncha)
Uningthou (common name could not be ascertained)
Nganu thanggong /ruddy shelduck (Tadorna ferruginea)
Thanggong mal /Eurasian wigeon (Anas penelope)
Nagaland
Tharoichabi/open-billed stork/Asian openbill (Anastomus
oscitans) Birds
Thoidingam /gadwall (Anas strepera) Ashy bulbul (Hemixos flavala)
Tingi/lesser whistling teal/lesser whistling-duck Austen’s barwing (Actinodura waldeni)
(Dendrocygna javaica) Beautiful sibia (Heterophasia pulchella)
Uren porom /common coot ( Fulica atra) Blue-throated barbet (Megalaima asiatica)
Utsai saingou /grey heron (Ardea cinerea) Blyth’s tragopan (Tragopan blythii)
Animals Chestnut thrush (Turdus rubrocanus)
Asiatic black bear/bhaloo (Ursus thibetanus) Dark-rumped swift (Apus acuticauda)
Chinese pangolin (Manis pentadactyla) Great pied hornbill/ Great hornbill (Buceros bicornis)
Clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa) Green-backed tit (Parus monticolus)
Golden cat (Catopuma temmincki) Grey peacock pheasant (Polyplectron bicalcaratum)
Hoolock gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock) Grey sibia (Heterophasia gracilis)
Indian elephant (Elephas maximus) Grey-hooded warbler (Seicercus xanthoschistos)
Kak-thenggu /Malayan box turtle (Cuora amboinensis) Kalij pheasant (Lophura leucomelanos)
Kharsa /Hog deer (Axis porcinus) Mrs Hume’s pheasant (Syrmaticus humiae)
Lamok/Wild boar/ Wild pig (Sus scrofa) Orange-bellied chloropsis/ Orange-bellied leafbird
Leihao (scientific name could not be ascertained) (Chloropsis harwickii)
Leopard (Panthera pardus) Rufous-necked hornbill (Aceros nipalensis)
Malayan sun bear (Helarctos malayanus) Silver-eared mesia (Leiothrix argentauris)
Marbled cat (Pardofelis marmorata) Whiskered yuhina (Yuhina flavicollis)
Moirang sathibi achouba/ Large Indian civet (Viverra White-naped yuhina (Yuhina bakeri)
zibetha)
Red jungle fowl (Gallus gallus)
 25
Animals Watercock (Gallicrex cinerea)
Asiatic black bear/ bhaloo (Ursus thibetanus) White-breasted waterhen (Amaurornis phoenicurus)
Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak) Yellow bittern (Ixobrychus sinensis)
Clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa) Yellow-wattled lapwing (Vanellus malabaricus)
Common otter (species could not be ascertained) Animals
Gaur (Bos gaurus) Asian wild buffalo(Bubalus arnee)
Himalayan/ Asiatic black bear/ bhaloo (Ursus Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak)
thibetanus)
Blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra)
Himalyan crestless porcupine (Hystrix brachyura)
Black-naped hare (Lepus nigricollis nigricollis)
Hoolock gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock)
Cheetal/harina/spotted deer (Axis axis)
Jungle cat (Felis chaus)
Four-horned antelope (Tetracerus quadricornis)
Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Gaur (Bos gaurus)
Mithun (Bos frontalis)
Hyena (Hyena hyena)
Sambar (Cervus unicolor)
Indian elephant (Elephas maximus)
Serow (Naemorhedus sumatraensis)
Indian rock python (Python molurus molurus)
Sloth bear (Melursus ursinus)
Indian soft-shelled turtle (Asperadetus gangeticus)
Slow loris (Nycticebus coucang)
Irrawaddy dolphin (Orcaella brevirostris)
Spotted linsang (Prionodon pardicolor)
Jackal (Canis aureus)
Stump-tailed macaque (Macaca arctoides)
Kado or mahaseer fish (Tor mahanadicus)
Tiger (Panthera tigris)
Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Wild boar / wild pig (Sus scrofa)
Macaques (Macaca sp.)
Wild dog (Cuon alpinus)
Mouse deer (Moschiola meminna)
Plants
Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus)
Dzuku lily / Siroy lily (Lilium chitrangadae)
Olive Ridley turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea)
Khwunoria (Goultheria fragrantisima)
Saltwater crocodile (Crocodylus porosus)
Sambar (Cervus unicolor)
Orissa
Sloth bear (Melursus ursinus)
Birds
Tiger (Panthera tigris)
Black bittern (Dupetor flavicollis)
Wild boar/ Wild pig (Sus scrofa)
Bronze-winged jacana (Metopidius indicus)
Wild buffalo (Bubalus arnee)
Brown crake (Amaurornis akool)
Wild dog or dhole (Cuon alphinus)
Cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis)
Plants
Cinnamon bittern (Ixobrychus cinnamomeus)
Acacia sp. (species could not be ascertained)
Common coot ( Fulica atra)
Amaltash (Cassia fistula)
Cotton pygmy-goose (Nettapus coromandelianus)
Amla/ aonla (Emblica officinalis)
Fulvous whistling teal (Dendrocygna bicolor)
Babul (Acacia nilotica)
Great egret (Casmerodius albus)
Bael/Bel (Aegle marmelos)
Grey heron (Ardea cinerea)
Beheda/bahada/baheda (Terminalia bellerica)
Indian cormorant (Phalocrocorax fuscicollis)
Bija (Pterocarpus marsupium)
Indian /common moorhen (Gallinula chloropus)
Black gram (Vigna mungo)
Indian pond heron (Ardeola grayii)
Bridelia retusa (common name could not be
Intermediate egret (Mesophoyx intermedia ) ascertained)
Lesser whistling teal/lesser whistling duck Cashew (Anacardium occidentale)
(Dendrocygna javanica)
Casuarina (Casuarina equistifolia)
Little cormorant (Phalocrocorax niger)
Chakunda (Cassia siamea)
Little egret (Egretta garzetta)
Char/charoli (Buchanania lanzan)
Little heron (Butorides striatus)
Dhaoda (Anogeissus latifolia)
Night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax)
Dhobein or passi (Dalbergia paniculata)
Open-billed stork/Asian openbill (Anastomus oscitans)
Eucalyptus sp.
Oriental pratincole (Glareola maldivarum)
Ficus sp.
Painted stork (Mycteria leucocephala)
Gamhar (Gmelia arobrea)
Pheasant-tailed jacana (Hydrophasianus chirurgus)
Haldu (Adina cordifolia)
Purple heron (Ardea purpurea)
Harida (Terminalia chebula)
Purple moorhen /purple swamp-hen (Porphyrio
porphyrio) Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus)

Red-wattled lapwing (Vanellus indicus) Jamun (Syzygium cumini)

Spotbilled duck (Anas poecilorhyncha) Kamlagundi (Mallotus phillippinensis)

Karala (Guizotia abyssinica)
26
Karanj (Pongamia pinnata) Tiger (Panthera tigris)
Kendu (Diospyros melanoxylon) Wild boar/ wild pig (Sus scrofa)
Khajur (Phoenix sylvestris) Wild dog (Cuon alpinus)
Kochila (Strychnos nuxvomica) Plants
Kurum (Adina cordifolia) Chir pine (Pinus roxburghii)
Mahua/mahul/ mohul (Madhuca longifolia) Khejari (Prosopis cineraria)
Mango (Mangifera indica) Peepal (Ficus religiosa)
Neem (Azadirachta indica) Sal (Shorea robusta)
Palash (Butea monosperma) Tendu (Diospyros melanoxylon)
Polang (could not be ascertained)
Purple orchid tree (Bauhinia purpurea) Punjab
Ragi (Eleusine coracana ) Birds
Sabai grass (Eulaliopsis binata) (scientific name could Partridge (Galloperdix sp)
not be verified)
Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus)
Sal (Shorea robusta)
Animals
Saru or taro (Colocasia esculenta)
Blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra)
Shalmali/red silk-cotton tree (Bombax ceiba)
Black-naped hare (Lepus nigricollis)
Shishu (Dalbergia sissoo)
Chinkara/Indian gazelle (Gazella bennettii)
Siali (Bauhinia vahlii)
Jungle cat (Felis chaus)
Sidha (Lagerstroemia parviflora)
Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus)
Spinous kino tree (Bridella retusa)
Plants
Tamarind (Tamarindus indica)
Jungli ber (Ziziphus nummularia)
Teak (Tectona grandis)
Khejari (Prosopis cineraria)
Tendu (Diospyros melanoxylon)
Mango (Mangifera indica)

Overview Rajasthan
Birds Birds
Beautiful sibia (Heterophasia pulchella) Black ibis (Pseudibis papillosa)
Black-headed ibis (Threskiornis melanocephalus) Black-necked stork (Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus)
Blyth’s tragopan (Tragopan blythii) Black-winged stilt (Himantopus himantopus)
Demoiselle crane (Anthropoides virgo) Common moorhen (Gallinula chloropus)
Great Indian bustard (Ardeotis nigriceps) Cotton teal (Nettapus coromandelianus)
Grey peacock pheasant (Polyplectron bicalcaratum) Curlew (Burhinus oedicnemus)
Grey sibia (Heterophasia grasilis) Demoiselle crane /kurja (Anthropoides virgo)
Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus) Eurasian wigeon (Anas penelope)
Open-billed stork/Asian openbill (Anastomus oscitans) Great Indian bustard (Ardeotis nigriceps)
Painted stork (Mycteria leucocephala) Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus)
Rufous-necked hornbill (Aceros nipalensis) Lesser whistling teal / lesser whistling-duck
Spot-billed pelican (Pelecanus philippensis) (Dendrocygna javanica)
White-naped yuhina (Yuhina bakeri) Northern pintail (Anas acuta)
Animals Northern shoveller (Anas clypeata)
Asiatic black bear/ bhaloo (Ursus thibetanus) Painted stork (Mycteria leucocephala)
Blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra) Purple moorhen /purple swamphen (Porphyrio
porphyrio)
Chinkara/Indian gazelle (Gazella bennettii)
Red-wattled lapwing (Vanellus indicus)
Elephant (Elephas maximus)
Sarus cranes (Grus antigone)
Golden langur (Trachypithecus geei)
Spotbilled duck (Anas poecilorhyncha)
Hanuman langur (Semnopithecus entellus)
White-breasted kingfisher (Halycon smyrnensis)
Hoolock gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock)
White-breasted waterhen (Amaurornis phoenicurus)
Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Animals
Lion (Panthera leo)
Blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra)
Olive Ridley turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea)
Black-naped hare (Lepus nigricollis)
Sambar (Cervus unicolor)
Cheetal/ spotted deer (Axis axis)
Sloth bear (Melursus ursinus)
Chinkara/Indian gazelle (Gazella bennettii)
Snow leopard (Uncia uncia)
Common coot (Fulica atra)
Spotted linsang (Prionodon pardicolor)
Hanuman langur (Semnopithecus entellus)
Stump-tailed macaque (Macaca arctoides)
Common Indian grey mongoose (Herpestes edwardsi)
 27
Indian porcupine (Hystrix indica) Magnolia (Michelia cathcartii)
Indian wolf (Canis lupus) Nyssa javanica (common name could not be
Jackal (Canis aureus) ascertained)
Oak (Quercus sp.)
Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus)
Panther/leopard (Panthera pardus) Spondias axillaris (common name could not be
ascertained)
Sambar (Cervus unicolor)
Sloth bear (Melursus ursinus)
Tamil Nadu
Striped hyena (Hyaena hyaena)
Birds
Tiger (Panthera tigris)
Bar-headed goose (Anser indicus)
Wild boar / wild pig (Sus scrofa)
Black and orange flycatcher (Ficedula nigrorufa)
Plants
Black ibis (Pseudibis papillosa)
Babul (Acacia nilotica)
Black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax)
Bajra /pearl millet (Pennsetum typhoideum)
Black-winged stilt (Himantopus himantopus)
Bansora (Dendrocalamus strictus)
Common teal (Anas crecca)
Banyan (Ficus benghalensis)
Bramhiny kite (Haliastur indus)
Ber (Ziziphus spp.)
Cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis)
Berberi chaukar (could not be ascertained)
Comb ducks (Sarkidiornis melanotos)
Daru halad (Berberis aristata)
Cormorants (Phalacrocorax sp.)
Dhawada (Anogeissus latifolia)
Darter (Anhinga melanogaster)
Dhok (Anogeissus pendula)
Egrets (Unclear which species)
Guggal (Commiphora mukul)
Eurasian spoonbill (Platalea leucorodia)
Gular (Ficus racemosa)
Flamingoes (Phoenicopterus sp.)
Gurja/gurjan (Lannea coromandelica)
Godwits (Limosa sp.)
Jingha (Bauhinia racemosa)
Grey heron (Ardea cinerea)
Jowar/sorghum (Sorghum vulgare)
Spotbilled pelican (Palecanus philippensis)
Kakoon (Flacourtia indica)
Gulls (Larus spp.)
Kesar/saffron (Crocus sativus)
Herons (Ardeola sp., Ardea sp. and others)
Khair (Acacia catechu)
Ibises (Unclear which species)
Khejari (Prosopis cineraria)
Indian roller (Coracias bengalensis)
Neem (Azadirachta indica)
Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos)
Palash (Butea monosperma)
Montagu’s harrier (Circus pygargusi)
Peepal (Ficus religiosa)
Nilgiri flycatcher (Eumyias albicaudata)
Rohida (Tecomella undulata)
Nilgiri wood pigeon (Columba elphistonii)
Safed khair (Acaia chundra)
Northern pintails (Anas acuta)
Salar (Boswellia serrata)
Painted stork (Mycteria leucocephala)
Sarson /mustard (Brassicca sp.)
Pelican (Pelacanus spp.)
Sheesam /shisham (Dalbergia latifolia)
Sandpipers (species could not be ascertained)
Tamarind (Tamarindus indica)
Spoonbills (Platelea sp.)
Teak (Tectona grandis)
Spot-billed pelican (Pelecanus philippensis)
Tendu (Diospyros melanoxylon)
Stork (Unclear which species)
Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes)
Tern (Sterna spp. Chlidonias spp.)
Kala jeeree (Bunium persicum)
Verditer flycatcher (Eumyias thalassina)
White-bellied shortwing (Brachypteryx major)
Sikkim Animals
Animals
Gaur (Bos gaurus)
Musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster)
Plants
Plants
Alchemilla indica (common name could not be
Castanopsis hystrix (common name could not be ascertained)
ascertained)
Arjun (Terminalia arjuna)
Cherry (Prunus nepalens)
Capparis sp. (common name could not be ascertained)
Cinnamon (Cinnamomum impressinervium )
Crotalaria beddomeana
Daphniphyllum himalayense (common name could not
be ascertained) East Indian satinwood (Chloroxylon swietenia)
Eurya acuminata (common name could not be Elaeocarpus blascoi (common name could not be
ascertained) ascertained)
Machilus edulis (common name could not be Hardwood (scientific name could not be ascertained)
ascertained) Hova Sonerita (name could not be verified)
28
Indian wild lime (Atalantia monophylla) Lesser florican (Sypheotides indica)
Ironwood (Memecylon umbellatum) Sarus crane (Grus antigone)
Jasmine (Jasminum auriculatum) Animals
Karavel (Acacia nilotica) Gangetic river dolphin (Platanista gangetica)
Kurinji (Strobilanthes kunthianus) Nilgai / blue bull (Boselaphus tragocamelus)
Neem (Azadirachta indica) Plants
Nilgiri (Eucalyptus sp.) Ashoka (Polyalthia longifolia)
Orange cestrum (Cestrum aurantiacum) Babul (Acacia nilotica)
Paalai (Wrightia tinctoria) Banyan (Ficus benghalensis)
Phyllanthus sp. (common name could not be Ber (Ziziphus sp.)
ascertained) Cogon grass (Imperata cylindrica)
Pine (Pinus roxburghii) Dhatura (Datura innoxia)
Plectranthus sp. (common name could not be Doob (Cynodon dactylon)
ascertained)
Garara (Chrysopogon zizanioides)
Psydrax ficiformis (common name could not be
ascertained) Ironwood or mesquite (Prosopis juliflora)
Sandalwood (Santalum album) Jhau (Tamarix sp.)
Sirish (Albizia lebbeck) Karel (Capparis decidua)
Surai (Cupressus torulosa) Khair (Acacia catechu)
Tamarind (Tamarindus indica) Pudding-pipe or shami or Khejri (Prosopis cineraria = P.
spicigera)
Terminalia tomentosa (common name could not be
ascertained) Kush (Cynodon dactylon)
Wattle (Acacia sp) (species could not be ascertained) Lotus (Nelumbo nucifera)
Mahua (Madhuca longifolia)
Tripura Neem (Azadirachta indica)
Animals Peepal (Ficus religiosa)
Binturang (Arctictis binturong) Pomegranate (Punica granatum)
Bonrui (could not be ascertained) Poplar (Populus sp.)
Chinese pangolin (Manis pentadactyla) Safeda (Eucalyptus sp.)
Elephant (Elephas maximus) Sarkanda (Saccharum munja)
Goral (Naemorhedus goral) Sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum)
Hog badger (Arctonyx collaris) Teak (Tectona grandis)
Hoolock gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock) White acacia (Acacia leucocephala)
Indian wolf (Canis lupus) Wood apple/Bel (Aegle marmelos)
Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Leopard cat (Prionailurus bengalensis) Uttarakhand
Malayan giant squirrel (Ratufa bicolor) Birds
Marbled cat (Pardofelis marmorata) Asian koel (Eudynamys scolopacea)
Orange bellied squirrel (Dremomys lokriah) Bar-headed goose (Anser indicus)
Serow (Naemorhedus sumatraensis) Gull-billed tern (Gelochelidon nilotica)
Sloth bear (Melursus ursinus) Himalayan monal (Lophophorus impejanus)
Slow loris (Nycticebus coucang) Jungle fowl (Gallus sp)
Tiger (Panthera tigris) Kalij pheasant (Lophura leucomelanos)
Plants Koklass pheasant (Pucrasia macrolopha)
Sal (Shorea robusta) Lapwings (Vanellus sp.)
Dipterocarpus turbinatus Little tern (Sterna albifrons)
Lagerstroemia parviflora Long-tailed thrush (Zoothera dixoni)
Vitex peduncularis Munia (Lonchura sp.)
Terminalia bellerica Painted stork (Mycteria leucocephala)
Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus)
Uttar Pradesh Pine bunting (Emberiza leucocephalos)
Birds Plovers (species could not be ascertained)
Bar-headed goose (Anser indicus) Red-billed blue magpie (Urocissa erythrorhyncha)
Black francolin (Francolinus francolinus) Red-headed vulture (Sarcogyps calvus)
Brey francolin (Francolinus pondicerianus) Red-necked falcon (Falco chicquera)
Himalayan monal (Lophophorus impejanus) Rufous woodpecker (Celeus brachyurus)
House swift (Apus affinis) Sarus crane (Grus antigone)
Indian skimmer (Rynchops albicollis) Streak-throated woodpecker (Picus xanthopygaeus)
 29
White-rumped vulture (Gyps bengalensis) Champa (Pterospermum acerifolium)
White-tailed Eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) Chir (Pinus roxburghii)
Woolly-necked stork (Ciconia episcopus) Costus root (Costus speciosus)
Yellow-billed blue magpie (Urocissa flavirostris) Daru halad/daru haridra (Berberis aristata)
Grey-chinned minivet (Pericrocotus solaris) Deodar (Cedrus deodara)
Black-bellied tern (Sterna acuticauda) Dudhoi (Ficus nerifolii)
Indian blue robin (Luscinia brunnea) Fir (Abies sp.)
Western Tragopan (Tragopan melanocephalus) Gucchhi (Morchella esculenta)
Animals Horse chestnut (Aesculus indica)
Barking deer /kakar (Muntiacus muntjak) Jhula (could not be ascertained)
Brown bullfinch (Pyrrhula nipelensis) Kachnar (Bauhinia variegata)
Chestnut bunting (Emberiza rutila) Kail (Pinus wallichiana)
Ghurarh/ Goral (Naemorhedus goral) Kaint/mohal (Pyrus pashia)
Hanuman langur (Semnopithecus entellus) Kambal (Rhus wallichii)
Himalayan /Asiatic black bear/ bhaloo (Ursus Kangni or foxtail millet (Setaria italica)
thibetanus) Kaula/kawala (Machilus odoratissima)
Himalayan brown bear (Ursus arctos) Khair (Acacia catechu)
Himalayan musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) Khanor (Aesculus indica)
Himalayan yellow throated marten/ Chitrol (Martes Kharki (Celtis tetrandra)
flavigula)
Khejadi/ khejari (Prosopis cineraria)
Indian porcupine/ saulla ( Hystrix indica)
Khirik or toon (Cedrela toona)
Indian wild boar/ Wild pig /suar (Sus scrofa)
Kimu (Morus serrata)
Jackal (Canis aureus)
Kingorha (Berberis asiatica)
Jungle cat/ Van billi (Felis chaus)
Koda (Paspalum scrobiculatum)
Leopard cat/ ban bijju (Prionailurus bengalensis)
Kulatih or horse gram (Macrotyloma uniflorum)
Leopard/baghera (Panthera pardus)
Kutki/Karvi (Picrorhiza kurooa)
Mainland serow (Naemorhedus sumatrensis)
Lantana (Lantana camara)
Musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster)
Lodhra (Symplocos crataegoides)
Rhesus macaque /bandar (Macaca mulatta)
Lycium (could not be ascertained)
Rufous-tailed hare/khargosh (Lepus nigricollis
ruficaudatus) Mahal bamboo (Bambusa longispiculata)
Sambar /jarhaoo (Cervus unicolor) Maize (Zea mays)
Snow leopard (Uncia uncia) Masar or masoor (Lens esculenta)
Tiger/ bagh (Panthera tigris) Moong or mash (Phaseolus aureus)
Plants Mulberry or shahtoot (Morus serrata)
Aadu (Prunus persia) Oak (Quercus leucotrichophora)
Aam (Mangifera indica) Oak of Western Himalayas (Quercus incana)
Ainyaar (Lyonia ovalifolia) Paiyya (Prunus cerasoides)
Akhrot (Juglans regia) Phaja (Prunus cerasoides)
Amla (Emblica officinalis) Pangoi/paranga (Acer oblongum)
Amrud (Psidium guajava) Peepal (Ficus religiosa)
Apricot (Prunus armeniaca) Phapra (Fagopyrum tataricum )
Baan oak (Quercus incana) Pine (Pinus kasya or P. insularis)
Baherha (Terminalia bellerica) Poplar or safeda (Populus alba)
Bamboo /ringal (Arundinaria sp.) Rai or spruce (Abies smithiana)
Banaksha (Viola odorata) Raini\ rohini (Mallotus philippensis)
Banj oak (Quercus leucotrichophora) Rajma beans (Phaseolus vulgaris)
Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak) Rakhal/ yew (Taxus baccata)
Bashroi/bhainshra (Salix daphnoides) Rhododendrons (Rhododendron sp.)
Bathu (Chenopodium album) Sandan (Ougeinia oojeinensis)
Beel (Aegle marmelos) Sal (Shorea robusta)
Beul (Grewia oppositifolia) Semla (Bauhinia retusa)
Bhambela (Euonymus pendulus) Shurur (Litsea umbrosa)
Bheemal/ bhiyul (Grewia optiva) Silver oak (Grevillea robusta)
Bhojpatra/ birch (Betula utilis) Simbal (Bombax ceiba)
Bugi or Phichi grass (Trachaedium royalii - scientific Sissoo (Dalbergia sissoo)
name could not be verified) Spikenard (Nardostachys jatamansi)
Buraans (Rhododendron arboreum) Surai (Cupresses torulosa)
30
Timla (Ficus roxburghii)
Tosh (Abies pindrow)
Tun (Cedrala toona)
Tuni (Toona ciliata)
Ut (Alnus nepalensis)

West Bengal
Birds
Adjutant stork (unclear lesser or greater)
Hornbill (Buceros sp) (unclear which species)
Merganser (Mergus merganser)
Osprey (Pandion haliaetus)
Peacock/Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus)
Open-billed stork/ Asian openbill (Anastomus oscitans)
Animals
Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak)
Fishing cat (Prionailurus viverrinus)
Gangetic dolphin (Platanista gangetica)
Goral (Naemorhedus goral)
Leopard (Panthera pardus)
Little porpoise (Neophocaena phocaenoides)
Monkeys (Macaca sp.)
Olive Ridley turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea)
Saltwater crocodile (Crocodylus porosus)
Tiger (Panthera tigris)
Plants
Bamboo (Dendrocalamus strictus)
Ber (Ziziphus mauritiana)
Nettle (Urtica atrichocaulis)
Peepal (Ficus religiosa)
Tulsi (Ocimum tenuiflorum)
Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes)
Yarrow (Achillea millefolium)
State chapter contributors’ names and affiliations
Afiffulah Khan and Faiza Abbasi Puja Ahluwalia
Wildlife Society of India, Research Associate, Centre for Public Policy,
Department of Wildlife Sciences, Indian Institute of Management,
Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh- 202002 Bannerghatta road, Bangalore – 560076
Email: afifkhan@rediffmail.com Email id: pujanagia@yahoo.co.in,
Tel: 0571-701052 pujaa@iimb.ernet.in
Alka Sabharwal Rakesh Agrawal
1C, Sarah Street, 90-A (M.I.G. First phase),
Maylands 6051, WA, Australia. Indira Puram,
E-mail: alkasabharwal@yahoo.com p.o. Majra, Dehradun - 248171,
Archana Prasad Uttarakhand
Reader, Centre for Jawaharlal Nehru Studies, Roshni Kutty
Jamia Milia Islamia, New Delhi 110025 305 Satya Sai Plaza,
Or Sector II, New Panvel, Maharashtra
TRSA 58, NPL colony, Email: roshi73@rediffmail.com,
New Rajendra Nagar, New Delhi-110 060 Tel: 022-32982066(R), 020-25675450, 020-
Email: darchie@hotmail.com 25654239(O)
Tel: 011-3017378 (0) 011-5773212 (R), Ruchi Pant
9968099911(M) 16 Deshbandhu Apartments,
Darab J. Nagarwalla Kalkaji,
PRAKRITI-Society for Promotion of Sustainable New Delhi 110019.
Livelihoods from Nature, Email: ruchi_kumaon04@yahoo.co.in
Oakville, Landour, Tel: 011- 251603984, 09810845648
Mussoorie-248179, Uttarakhand Sandeep Khanwalkar
Email: lurntsu@rediffmailcom, ARAVALI, Patel Bhawan, HCM-RIPA,
darabnagarwalla@woodstock.ac.in Jawaharlal Nehru Marg,
Tel: 0135-2635900 ext. 240, 9837653382 Jaipur 302017, Rajasthan
Kalpavriksh Email: khanwalkar_s@rediffmail.com
5, Shri Dutta Krupa, 908 Deccan Gymkhana M.D. Subash Chandran
Pune-411004, Maharashtra Environmental Consultant,
Email: neema.pb@gmail.com C-789, Viveknagar,
Tel: 020-25675450, 25654239(O) 9850952359 (M) KUMTA 581 343, Karnataka
Neelima Jerath and Ashdeep Kaur Or
Joint Director -Environment, Department of Botany,
Punjab State Council for Science and Technology, A.V. Baliga college,
Sector 26, Adjacent to Sacred Heart School, Kumta 581343, Uttara Kannada, Karnataka
Chandigarh-160019 E-mail: mdschandra@yahoo.com
Email: neelimakj@yahoo.co.uk Virinder Sharma
Tel: 91-0172-2793300, 2793600, 2793141, State Council for Science, Technology and Environment,
2792325(O) 91-0172-2793143(F) 34 SDA Complex, Kasumpati, Shimla 71009
Nakul Chettri E-mail: virsharma2005@yahoo.co.in
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Yogesh Gokhale
Development (ICIMOD), Ph.D, Associate Fellow, The Energy and Resources
P.O. Box 3226, Kathmandu, Nepal Institute,
Tel: 00977-1-5525313 Darbari Seth Block, Habitat Place,
E-mail: nchettri@icimod.org Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003
Prahlad C., Subhash Mali, Ramesh Patel, Srinivas E-mail: yogeshg@teri.res.in
Mudrakartha Tel: 011-24682100, 24682111, Fax: 011-
Nehru Foundation for Development, 24682144/2145.
Thaltej Tekka,
Ahmedabad 380054, Gujarat
E-mail: mail@viksat.org
Tel: 079-26426220

31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38

List of CCAs as referred to in the maps

Map Kind of
State Village District
ref. no initiative
1. Andhra Pradesh Behroonguda village Adilabad Forest
2. Andhra Pradesh Veerapuram village Anantapur Heronry
3. Andhra Pradesh Kalapavalli (8 villages) Anantpur Forest
4. Andhra Pradesh Pedullupalle village Cadappa Heronry
5. Andhra Pradesh Uppalapadu village Guntur Heronry
6. Andhra Pradesh Mantoor village Medak Forest

7. Andhra Pradesh Nellapattu & Vedurapattu villages Nellore Heronry

8. Andhra Pradesh Sova village Vishakapattanam Forest

9. Arunachal Pradesh Mega, Molo and Dipu villages Along Sacred grove
10. Arunachal Pradesh Apatani valley Lower Subhansari Forest
11. Arunachal Pradesh Sangti valley West Kameng Species
12. Assam Shankarghola village Bongaigaon Species
13. Assam Chakrashila sanctuary Dhubri Species
14. Assam Khawrakrai village Karbi-Anglong Forest
15. Assam New Kubing village North Cachar Hills Forest
16. Bihar Motichak village Bhagalpur Species
Junawani and Ulnar (with 12
17. Chhattisgarh Bastar Forest
villages)
18. Chhattisgarh Chamanpur village Sarguja Forest
19. Chhattisgarh Ganeshpura village Sarguja Forest
20. Chhattisgarh Karundamunda village Sarguja Forest
21. Gujarat Chusana Island Jamnagar Mangrove
22. Gujarat Malekpur village Vadodara Forest
23. Gujarat Kawant region Vadodara Forest
24. Himachal Pradesh Kamla village Chamba Forest
25. Himachal Pradesh Rajain village Chamba Forest
Mcleodgunj & nearby villages
26. Himachal Pradesh Dharamshala Species
(Pong wetland)
27. Himachal Pradesh Chhitkul village Kinnaur Forest
28. Himachal Pradesh Padhar village Kullu Forest
29. Himachal Pradesh Shanag village Kullu Forest
30. Himachal Pradesh Nanj village Mandi Forest
31. Himachal Pradesh Thalli village Mandi Forest
32. Himachal Pradesh Panjawar village Una Forest
33. Jammu & Kashmir Garoora village Baramulla Forest
Sacred
34. Karnataka Sacred groves of Virajpet taluka Kodagu
grove
35. Karnataka Kokare Bellure village Mysore Heronry
Sacred
36. Karnataka Hunsur village Shimoga
grove
37. Karnataka Shiroor Alalli village Shimoga Forest
38. Karnataka Kaggaladu village Tumkur Heronry
39. Karnataka Nagavalli village Tumkur Species
40. Karnataka Doddabail hamlet, Bhairumbe Uttar Kannada Forest
41. Karnataka Halkar village Uttar Kannada Forest
Sacred
42. Kerala Iringole Kavu Eranakulam
grove
Sacred
43. Kerala Aravanchal Kavu Kannoor
grove
44. Kerala Ashtamudi lake Kollam Estuary
45. Kerala Kolavipaalam Beach, Iringal Kozhikode Species
46. Maharashtra Hiware Bazaar village Ahmadnagar Forest
Sacred
47. Maharashtra Bolunda village Bhandara
grove
48. Maharashtra Botha village Buldhana Forest
 39

49. Maharashtra Belgata village Chandrapur Forest

50. Maharashtra Chorati village Chandrapur Forest
51. Maharashtra Lakhapur village Chandrapur Forest
52. Maharashtra Saigata village Chandrapur Forest
53. Maharashtra Adiyal tekdi Chandrapur Forest
Sacred
54. Maharashtra Siddheshwar village Chandrapur
grove
55. Maharashtra Satara Tukum village Chandrapur Forest
56. Maharashtra Baripada village Dhule Forest
57. Maharashtra Mendha-Lekha village Gadchiroli Forest
Sacred
58. Maharashtra Ajeevali village Pune
grove
59. Maharashtra Morachi Chincholi village Pune Species
60. Maharashtra Ravangaon village Pune Species
61. Maharashtra Shirsuphal village Pune Forest
Sacred
62. Maharashtra Maangaon village Pune
grove
63. Manipur Loktak lake Bishnupur wetland
64. Manipur Upper Ngatan village Senapati Forest
65. Manipur Khambi village Ukhrul Forest
66. Manipur Shirui Hill, Shirui Ukhrul Species
67. Manipur Mapum village Ukhrul Forest
68. Manipur Ngainga village Ukhrul Forest
Sacred
69. Meghalaya Ri Bhoi
Thiang sacred grove (7 villages) grove
Forest and
70. Nagaland Khonoma village Kohima
species
Forest and
71. Nagaland Sendenyu village Kohima
species
Forest and
72. Nagaland Toufema village Kohima
species
Forest and
73. Nagaland Changtongya village Mokokchung
species
74. Nagaland Kongan village Mon Forest
Chizami and neighbouring 5 Forest and
75. Nagaland Phek
villages species
Forest and
76. Nagaland Luzophuhu village Phek
species
77. Nagaland Kikruma village Phek Forest
Forest and
78. Nagaland Zanibu peak Phek
species
Forest and
79. Nagaland Chishilimi village zonheboto
species
80. Nagaland Tizu village zonheboto Species
Rupabalia reserved forest (8
81. Orissa Dhenkanal Forest
villages)
82. Orissa Manglajodi village Ganjam Species
83. Orissa Rushikulya rookery Ganjam Species
84. Orissa Jhargoan village Jharsuguda Forest
85. Orissa Budhikhamari village Mayurbhanj Forest
86. Orissa Patharaghara village Mayurbhanj Forest
87. Orissa Sunaposi (11 villages) Mayurbhanj Forest
88. Orissa Ghusuria village Mayurbhanj Forest
89. Orissa Dengajhari village Nayagarh Forest
90. Orissa Dhani Panch Mouza (5 villages) Nayagarh Forest
91. Orissa Gadabankilo village Nayagarh Forest
Samantsinharpur, Andharua
92. Orissa Nayagarh Forest
villages
93. Orissa Balukhand Konark sanctuary Puri Mangrove
94. Orissa Binjgiri hill (8 villages) Puri Forest
95. Orissa Huta village Sambalpur Species
40

96. Orissa Maneshwar temple Sambalpur Species

97. Orissa Jharbeda village Sundargarh Forest
98. Orissa Kodbahal Sundargarh Species
99. Orissa Phuljhar village Sundargarh Forest
100. Orissa Jarmal village Sundergarh Forest
101. Orissa Suruguda village Sundergarh Forest
102. Punjab Abhor (13 villages) Ferozepur Species
Todar Majra, Makrian, Chunni
103. Punjab Ropar Species
Khurad,Makar & Majatri villages
104. Rajasthan Bhaonta-Kolyala villages Alwar Forest
105. Rajasthan Kishori village Alwar Forest
106. Rajasthan Kailadevi sanctuary Karauli Forest
107. Rajasthan Ledhor-Kala village Karauli Forest

108. Rajasthan Patari Dang (Hill), Alampur village Karauli Forest

109. Rajasthan Udpuria village pond Kota Wetland

110. Rajasthan Kichan village Udaipur Species
111. Rajasthan Suali, Bhamti village Udaipur Forest
Sacred
112. Sikkim Kabi sacred groves Gangtok
grove
Khangchendzonga sacred
113. Sikkim Yuksam Wetland
landsapes
114. Tamil Nadu Longwood shola Coimbatore Forest
115. Tamil Nadu Pulicat lake Nellore Lagoon
116. Tamil Nadu Pambar shola Palni Hills Forest
117. Tamil Nadu Chittarangudi village Ramanathapuram Wetland
118. Tamil Nadu Koondakulam village Tiruneveli Wetland
119. Tripura Melghar village West Tripura Forest
120. Uttar Pradesh Amakhera village Aligarh Wetland
121. Uttar Pradesh Daupur village Aligarh Wetland
122. Uttar Pradesh Gursikaran Forest (20 villages) Aligarh Forest
123. Uttarakhand Khirakot village Almora Forest
124. Uttarakhand Simalgaon village Bageshwar Forest
Bageshwar and
125. Uttarakhand Dharamghar region Forest
Pithoragarh
Sacred
126. Uttarakhand Gwaldam village Chamoli
grove
Sacred
127. Uttarakhand Haryali Devi Chamoli
grove
128. Uttarakhand Pakhi and Jalgwad villages Chamoli Forest
129. Uttarakhand Nahikalan village Dehradun Forest
130. Uttarakhand Thapaliya-Mehargaon village Nainital Forest
131. Uttarakhand Dungri Chopra village Pauri Garhwal Forest
132. Uttarakhand Lohathal sacred grove Pithoragarh- Forest
Makku village van panchayat
133. Uttarakhand Rudraprayag Forest
(Makku and 8 villages)
134. Uttarakhand Nagchaund village Tehri Garhwal Forest
135. Uttarakhand Holta village Tehri Garhwal Forest
136. Uttarakhand Jardhargoan village Tehri Garhwal Forest
137. Uttarakhand Dakhyatgaon village Uttarkashi Forest
138. West Bengal Jogyanagar village Birbhum Heronry
139. West Bengal Rasikbeel village Cooch Behar Wetland
140. West Bengal Makaibari tea-estate Darjeeling Forest
Community Conserved
Areas in India
An overview
Contents of the overview
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 45
What are the main objectives of the CCA Directory?
How is this overview structured?
1. Definitions and clarifications .......................................................................................................... 47
1.1 What are Community Conserved Areas (CCAs)?
1.2. How can CCAs be defined?
1.3. What criteria can be used to call an area a CCA?
2. A categorisation of CCAs based on some of the main characteristics .......................................... 51
2.1. What are the origins of CCAs?
2.2. What are the main objectives of CCAs?
2.3. Are the management practices new or old?
2.4. How much area do CCAs conserve?
2.5. Who owns the lands on which CCAs exist?
2.6. What institutions are commonly used for conservation?
2.7. What are the conservation systems, rules and regulations used?
2.8. Do CCAs always exist in isolation?
2.9. Which ecosystems do CCAs cover?
3. CCAs as protected areas (PAs) ........................................................................................................ 65
4. Impacts of CCAs ............................................................................................................................ 69
4.1. What costs do CCAs entail for communities?
4.2 How do communities benefit from conservation?
4.3 How do CCAs benefit wildlife and biodiversity?
5. Major threats and challenges faced by CCAs ................................................................................ 75
5.1. What are the internal threats faced by CCAs?
5.2 What are the external threats faced by CCAs?
6. Main limitations of CCAs ............................................................................................................... 77
6.1. What are the ecological limitations?
6.2. What are the social limitations?
7. Key issues and lessons .................................................................................................................. 80
7.1. Security of tenure
7.2. Site-specific and decentralised management
7.3. Coordinated action and support
7.4. A landscape approach
7.5. Governance and decision-making
7.6. Institution building and local institutions
7.7. The role of the outsider
7.8. Role of local leadership
7.9. Integration of conservation and livelihoods
7.10. Funding
8. Legal and policy spaces for CCAs ...................................................................................................... 88
8.1 What spaces are available for CCAs in Indian law?
8.2 What spaces are available for CCAs in Indian policies and plans?
8.3 International context and support for CCAs
9. Conclusion and way ahead ............................................................................................................ 94
Boxes
Box 1: CCAs for forest ecosystems
Box 2: CCAs for wetland, coastal and marine habitats
Box 3: CCAs for protection of individual species
Box 4: Sacred sites as CCAs
Box 5: Influences and inspirations behind CCAs
Box 6: Reviving tradition out of necessity
Box 7: Hunting fine in Khonoma, Nagaland
Box 8: Major points emerging from international debates on whether CCAs can be considered PAs?
Box 9: Why are CCAs important for conservation?
Box 10: Principles of good governance of protected areas
Box 11: Highlights of the provisions of PESA
Box 12: The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP)
Figures
Figure 1: Example of a broad categorisation based on three of the many characteristics
Figure 2: Origin of CCAs
Figure 3: Agency that inspired the origin
Figure 4: Objectives and motivations behind CCAs
Figure 5: Old or new management practices
Figure 6: Range of area within which the documented CCAs fall
Figure 7: Who owns the lands on which CCAs exist?
Figure 8: Types of institutions
Figure 9: Written and unwritten rules
Figure 10: Resource patrolling as a monitoring system
Figure 11: Penalties for violation of CCA rules
Figure 12: CCAs occurring in clusters
Figure 13: Ecosystems that CCAs conserve
Figure 14: CCAs fulfilling key elements of the IUCN/CBD definitions
Figure 15: CCAs in India that can potentially be included under various categories
Figure 16: Benefits to the communities
Figure 17: Ecological impacts of CCAs
Figure 18: CCAs threatened by internal and external factors
Figure 19: Results of government intervention in CCAs
Tables
Table 1: CCAs in India that can potentially be included under various IUCN PA categories
Table 2: Positive ecological impacts of CCAs in India
Table 3: Different governance types for IUCN categories of PAs
Community Conserved Areas in India - An overview
Neema Pathak1

Introduction
In 1798, in a small village called Vedanthangal near Chennai, British soldiers shot some storks in
the local wetland. The villagers stormed the collector’s office and made him issue a koul or order
that no one was to harm the nesting birds.2 This is long before the concept of protected areas
(PA)3 as we know them today was even thought of. Indian history is peppered with numerous such
examples, many reported by the British and in recent times by many other scholars and researchers
such as Chandran and Kalam (1997),4 Chandrashekhara and Shankar (1998),5 Das and Malhotra
(1998),6 Gadgil (1995)7 and Gadgil and Guha (1962)8. Many of these local efforts at conservation,
regeneration and/or management have continued for generations but many others are emerging in
newer situations and circumstances. The reasons for their existence, continuance and emergence
are varied: countering depletion of life-sustaining resources, maintaining watersheds, seeking
ecological benefits, conservation of wildlife and biodiversity and or religious/cultural sentiments.
The local institutions used to achieve these objectives are also diverse: they could either be
traditional structures, revived structures in modified form, or sometimes even completely new
structures. One common thread in these efforts is that their roots often lie in the traditional or
local knowledge systems and experiences, and the primary managers and decision-makers are
the local communities. The mechanisms and approaches followed are locale-specific, based on the
nature and character of the residing or user human society, surrounding natural resources, nature
of interaction between the two, and other internal and external factors influencing the community
and the resource. Considering that India is a country of a huge diversity of cultures, ecosystems
and species, it is not surprising that the community efforts at conservation are also extremely
diverse. The strength of these systems lies in the social rules that they follow and local systems
of conflict resolution that they adopt. In a country as culturally and ecologically diverse as India,
the diversity of such initiatives, their characteristics, objectives, systems of management, rules,
regulations and impacts is but natural.
On the other hand, whether in India or abroad, nature conservation today is formally
predominantly understood to happen only within the limited boundaries of PAs declared and
managed by government agencies under statutory provisions. Invariably these PAs are conceived
as islands where any form of human intervention is considered harmful for the ecosystem and
species. It is therefore not surprising that in a densely populated country like India, where millions
of people still live within and depend for survival on natural ecosystems, this has resulted in
numerous conflicts between the local communities and official managers of these protected lands
and waters.9 The fact that a relatively large network of conservation efforts by local people in India
could provide a system of biodiversity conservation that is complementary to the government-run
network of protected areas has remained largely unrecognised and hence unexplored. As per our
understanding, losing out on this experience of generations has been one of the greatest loses
for wildlife and biodiversity in India, as many of these efforts could provide important lessons on
how to tackle the conflicts that wildlife officials face with the local people, or how to build robust
institutions for governance and management.
Lack of sufficient and detailed information about these initiatives and their assimilation into the
policy making system is to a great extent responsible for their lack of recognition as important
models to achieve conservation and livelihood security in the country. We believe that if such
initiatives are officially recognized and lessons learnt from their strengths and weaknesses find
their way into conservation laws and policies, then India could bring more than 10 per cent of the
country’s landmass under conservation (official PAs cover a little less than 5%).
In the past few decades, much work has been done towards examining traditional systems and
knowledge related to conservation, religious and spiritual sentiments and their role in conservation,
and government-sponsored schemes such as joint forest management (JFM) and their role in
involving local people in forest regeneration. However, there were only occasional mentions and
articles on other kinds of efforts of local communities, such as those achieving conservation while
protecting resources for livelihood needs, or local communities protecting resources to assert
their rights and responsibilities, or local communities protecting biodiversity for the sake of
biodiversity or to protect a specific species or habitat. Thus the full range, extent and impacts of
the phenomenon that we have chosen to call community conserved areas (CCAs) (as defined in
Section 1.2) remained unrecognised.
With this realisation, the Directory of Community Conserved Areas was initiated less than a decade

45
46 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

ago to document a diversity of efforts. Conservation here does not only mean ‘strict protection’,
but includes a continuum of practices ranging from strict protection to regulated multiple-use.

What are the main objectives of the CCA Directory?

The main objectives with which this Directory was started included exploring the following facets
in detail:
1. Reasons that motivate communities to start conservation initiatives
2. Social and ecological processes that are involved in these initiatives
3. Constraints that these communities face and opportunities that are available to them
4. The manner in which internal differences and inequities in a community impact the conservation
efforts and vice versa
5. Effective legal and policy changes needed to facilitate these initiatives
6. Area of the country that is under such conservation
7. The reasons because of which these initiatives succeed or fail
8. Role of these initiatives in sustaining local livelihoods
9. Role of these initiatives in achieving conservation of resources and protection of species
This analysis and compilation is not to give the impression that communities everywhere in
India are conservation-oriented. Even if they number in their thousands, initiatives like the ones
mentioned in this directory would still be small compared to India’s enormous landmass. In
many communities (probably the majority), traditions of conservation have been eroded, and
natural ecosystems have been converted to other land uses. Nor are we implying that all village-
level initiatives are unqualified successes. Like official protected areas, CCAs too have a host of
serious problems to contend with. These include dissension and inequities within the community,
weaknesses in countering powerful commercial forces from outside, lack of knowledge regarding
the full range of biodiversity and its value, the pressures of abject poverty, and others.
However, the fact remains that many such efforts have existed and continue to emerge in the
current fast-changing global and local socio-economic situations. They can do with considerable
support from NGOs and government agencies to deal with internal weaknesses and to thwart
external pressures and threats. There is an immediate need for further studies on these initiatives,
so that their full biodiversity and social values can be gauged and others can learn about and
from them. Some such work has been done, such as by Godbole et al (1998);10 Gokhale (2001);11
Kalam (1996);12 Kushalappa et al. (2001);13 and others, yet much needs to be done, particularly
in areas outside of those protected for religious reasons. It may also often be necessary to accord
these CCAs legal backup, especially so that communities can enforce their customary or unwritten
rules.

About the overview

The rest of this overview is an attempt to share our understanding of key characteristics of CCAs,
their strengths and weakness, some major issues facing them today, important lessons that they
reveal, and the limitations and constraints that they face. This overview draws partly from the
work done in the past by a number of researchers, academics, grassroots workers and others, but
is largely based on the state chapters and case studies in this directory (please do bear in mind
that the limitations of the Directory as mentioned in the ‘Introduction to the Directory’ may have a
bearing on this analysis too). A number of national and international dialogues and debates have
also helped in the analysis presented here. For a detailed list of case studies see annexure 1.

How is this overview structured?

Section 1 deals with definitions, criteria and clarifications.
Section 2 deals with some of the main characteristics of CCAs, such as how much area a single
CCA conserves, how these efforts get initiated, who or what motivates them, how they evolve in
different circumstances, what kinds of rules and regulations they follow, what kinds of institutions
they have established, and so on.
-Section 3 explores whether CCAs in the Indian context can be considered PAs.14 This section
 Overview 47

draws from international experiences, debates and discussions in this regard. It further explores
the similarities, differences and complementarities between CCAs and PAs.
Section 4 looks at the positive and negative impacts that CCAs have had on the conserving
communities, as well as the biological diversity in these areas. This includes kinds of costs and
benefits that the communities have incurred.
Section 5 deals with some of the major threats that CCAs face, dividing such threats into two main
categories—external threats and internal threats.
Section 6 considers whether CCAs can provide solutions to all problems of conservation in India
or do they have limitations too. It examines what these limitations are and how they can be
overcome.
Section 7 explores a large range of issues and lessons that are involved in a discussion on CCAs,
mainly to see if the environment in the country is conducive to support and promote CCAs. This
section then goes on to examine some ways in which such an environment can be created. This
section also explores the lessons that can be learnt from the strengths and weaknesses of CCAs
for a more inclusive conservation model in the country, including consideration of a landscape
approach.
Section 9 looks at how effectively current Indian laws and policies are able to support CCAs or
whether they are in fact a hindrance.
Section 10 is the concluding section which also briefly discusses some steps for future action.
There are also a number of annexures along with this analysis. These further elaborate some of
the points mentioned in the text or provide more in-depth background.

1. Definitions and clarifications

This section deals with the definitions and terms that we have used.

1.1 What are Community Conserved Areas (CCAs)?

Before exploring the concept and the definition of CCAs it may be useful to take a glimpse at
different kinds of conservation efforts by ordinary people across India. Boxes 1 to 4 describe some
such efforts in different ecosystems (for details on these case studies see the case studies section
of specific states).

Box 1
CCAs for forest ecosystems
• The Gond tribal community in Mendha (Lekha) village of Gadchiroli District, Maharashtra,
initiated protection and de facto control over 1800 hectares of forest over two decades ago.
• Jardhargaon village in Uttarakhand has regenerated and protected 600-700 hectares of
forest, and revived several hundred varieties of agricultural crops.
• Van panchayats15 like Makku in Uttarakhand are protecting tens of thousands of hectares of
high-altitude pasture lands and forests.
• Villagers in Shankar Ghola in Assam are protecting forests that contain the highly threatened
golden langur.
• Community forestry initiatives in several thousand villages of Orissa have regenerated or
protected forests. Elephants are reportedly being sighted here now.
• Areas have been conserved as forest and wildlife reserves in Nagaland by various tribes in
dozens of villages, including a people’s sanctuary for the endangered Blyth’s tragopan in
Khonoma village.
• In Tokpa Kabui village of Churachandpur district in Manipur, 600 hectares of regenerated
village forest have been preserved in the Loktak Lake catchment by the Ronmei tribe.
• With help from the NGO Tarun Bharat Sangh (TBS), several dozen villages in Alwar district
have restored the water regime, regenerated forests and, in one case (Bhaonta-Kolyala),
declared a lok abhyaranya (people’s wildlife sanctuary).
48 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

Box 2
CCAs for wetland, coastal and marine habitats
• Uttar Pradesh is a locus of traditional wetlands conservation. In Amakhera village of Aligarh
district, the traditional wetland is used for irrigation and fishing. The wetland hosts a large
number of migratory birds, whom villagers are careful not to disturb. Patna Lake in Etah
District is home to up to 100,000 water birds in favourable seasons. The lake, declared a
wildlife sanctuary in 1991, has been protected for centuries as a sacred pond. Sareli village
in Kheri District supports a nesting population of over 1000 openbill storks, considered
harbingers of a good monsoon.
• Communities in hundreds of villages across India have protected heronries (e.g., Sareli
in UP, Nellapatu in Andhra Pradesh and Chittarangudi in Tamil Nadu). At Kokkare Bellur,
Karnataka, villagers offer protection against hunting and untoward treatment, sometimes
even foregoing their tamarind yield so that nesting birds are not disturbed. In Tamil Nadu,
the 700ha Chittarangudi tank attracts storks, ibises, herons, egrets, cormorants and other
migratory birds. Villagers do not allow any hunting or stealing of bird eggs. They do not burst
crackers during Diwali,16 and avoid commercial fishing. Local communities are protecting
similar tanks throughout coastal and wetland regions of India.
• Fisherfolk in Mangalajodi and other villages at the Chilika lagoon, Orissa, are protecting a
large population of waterfowl (once extensively hunted).
• A number of coastal communities are protecting critical coastal wildlife habitats such as
mangroves (in Orissa) and sea turtle nesting beaches (in Orissa, Goa and Kerala).

Box 3
CCAs for protection of individual species
• Protection of sea turtle eggs, hatchlings and nesting sites by fisherfolk communities is taking
place at Kolavipaalam in Kerala, Galgibag and Morjim in Goa, and Rushikulya and Gokharkuda
in Orissa. In 2006 and 2008, over 100,000 olive ridley turtles are reported to have nested at
Rushikulya.
• Youth clubs from the villages around Loktak Lake (Manipur) have formed the Sangai Protection
Forum to conserve the greatly endangered brow-antlered deer, which is endemic to this
wetland. They take part in the management of the Keibul Lamjao National Park, which forms
the core of the lake.
• The Buddhist Morpa community in Sangti Valley in Arunachal has co-existed with the
endangered blacknecked cranes for generations, viewing them as a harbinger of better rice
yields.
• In Khichan village in Rajasthan, the local population provides refuge and food to a wintering
population of up to 10,000 demoiselle cranes, ungrudgingly spending up to several hundred
thousand rupees annually to feed them grains.
• The Bishnoi community in Rajasthan, famous for its self-sacrificing defence of wildlife and
trees, continues strong traditions of conservation. In neighbouring Punjab, lands belonging
to the Bishnois have been declared as the Abohar Sanctuary in recognition of their wildlife
value. At all the Bishnoi sites, blackbuck and chinkara are abundant.
• At Buguda village in Ganjam District, Orissa, inhabitants have been protecting blackbuck for
centuries. Buguda was recently awarded the Chief Minister’s Award for wildlife conservation.

Box 4
Sacred sites as CCAs
• Sacred groves17 and landscapes are found throughout India, serving to protect rare and
endemic species, as well as critical biodiversity assemblages. Such groves also help meet the
 Overview 49

religious, cultural, political, economic, health and psychological needs of communities. Local
livelihood needs are sometimes met through restricted harvesting of biomass. Sacred forests
(orans) in the desert regions of Rajasthan are typically managed by the gram sabhas (village
assemblies). Some are open to limited grazing by livestock. Orans are important components
in the recharge of aquifers in the desert, where every single drop of water is precious. In
most orans, particularly in western Rajasthan, the dominant tree, khejari, is worshipped for
its immense value, as the tree enriches soil nitrogen, and during drought and famine its bark
is mixed with flour for consumption.
• The Khasi Hills of Meghalaya are characterised by pockets of rich biodiversity that have been
protected by the Khasi tribe and form the basis of nature worship practices in the area,
manifested in the trees, forests, groves and rivers. The Khasi people believe that those
who disturb the forest will die, and that sacred animals such as the tiger bring prosperity,
happiness and well-being. In fact, the people of Thaianing believe that the destruction of their
forest by their forefathers has caused ‘good luck’ (i.e., the tiger) to leave, leading directly to
suffering due to a scarcity of medicinal plants, wood, water and fertile soils. Sacred groves
are often quite limited in size, but there are at least 40 of them in Meghalaya (out of a total
recorded 79) that range from 50-400 ha, including the well- known Mawphlang sacred grove
at 75 hectares.
• There are several thousand sacred groves in Maharashtra, some still managed well,
others under grave threat. These include the famous Bhimashankar and Ahupe deorai in
Bhimashankar Wildlife Sanctuary, Durgubaicha Kila and others between Bhimashankar and
Kalsubai Harishchandragad Wildlife Sanctuaries. Ajeevali village in Pune district manages a
protected site for both spiritual and commercial reasons.
• Often entire landscapes are considered sacred (e.g. the Rathong Chu/Khangchendzonga
valley in Sikkim), helping to conserve many of its elements.

In addition to the kind of examples mentioned above there are many communities who have
traditionally led lifestyles with a minimal ecological footprint such as the Changpas of Ladakh (see
Ladakh section in Jammu and Kashmir chapter for more details). Such initiatives and lifestyles,
although highly threatened by today’s fast changing socio-economic conditions, have been
responsible for maintaining biological diversity in many parts of India to a great extent. Given this,
it is not surprising that India is among the 12 biodiversity hotspots in the world. In fact, it may be
one of the community-conservation-initiative hotspots too.
In these times when India is on a fast track of economic development and globalisation, the
community conservation initiatives of the kind mentioned above are crucially supported or
complemented by grassroots activism against destructive development. Several large hydroelectric
projects, such as those in Bhopalpatnam-Ichhampalli (Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh), Bodhghat
(Chhattisgarh), and Rathong Chu (Sikkim), which would have submerged valuable forest
ecosystems and wildlife habitats, have been stalled by mass tribal movements. Hundreds of
communities across Orissa, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and other states are fighting against large
and powerful mining companies and industries, and are often brutally killed in the process. Many
fisher communities across India are struggling against destructive fishing, including demanding a
ban on commercial trawling and fighting for implementation of the coastal regulation zone (CRZ)
notification. Their struggle will also help to save coastal and marine ecosystems from destructive
development activities.

1.2. How can CCAs be defined?

Considering the huge diversity of initiatives, it has been a big challenge for us to define these
dynamic efforts in a few words. After much discussion with a number of individuals working on this
subject we have finally adopted the following working definition for CCAs in India.18
Natural ecosystems (forest/marine/wetlands/grasslands/others), including those
with minimum to substantial human influence, containing significant wildlife and
biodiversity value, being conserved by communities for cultural, religious, livelihood, or
political purposes, using customary laws or other effective means.
The three important components of the term ‘CCA’ are ‘community‘, ‘conservation’ and ‘area‘.
To be able to understand CCAs better, it is important to understand what we mean by these three
terms.
50 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

a. What do we mean by a ‘community‘?

For the purpose of this compilation the definition of a community can be considered as:
A group of people geographically, culturally and traditionally linked, sharing an interest in and/or
interacting with a common natural resource base (ecosystems and species). The term, ‘community’
does not necessarily indicate a homogeneous entity.19
The term ‘communities’ in the subsequent sections could refer to an entire village or a group or
section of people (but not an individual or an individual family), who manage or conserve a given
area. It is also used as short form for an indigenous people (also called tribal people in India).

b. What do we mean by ‘conservation’?

By conservation we mean maintenance of one or more natural ecosystems and species.
This could be through absolute protection of a site or a species or through regulated multiple use.
Ecological data on most CCAs is non-existent and a glaring gap that needs to be filled. In the
absence of such data to ascertain the conservation efforts, we have based our conclusion that an
effort is leading towards conservation on perceptions, impressions and observations by a range of
actors, including local people, forest officials, personal observations of Kalpavriksh team members,
NGOs, amateur or professional ecologists and others. This data has been used in conjunction with
two other parameters:
1. There should be a specific aim (cultural, ecological, political or economic) of management or
conservation.
2. Taboos, rules and regulations (e.g., no hunting, no commercial use, regulated self-use) have
been established under local20 or state laws and are being followed. In our view, this implies that
resource use is regulated, providing a greater chance for sustained existence of ecosystems and
species.

c. What do we mean by an ‘area‘?

For this documentation we have selected sites where conservation values are operating within
specified boundaries. Systems, rules and regulation are implemented within this area. In India
there are numerous examples where conservation principles are ingrained in the ethos of the
common people such as worshipping the peepal tree, not harming the Hanuman langur, etc.
However, this does not necessarily mean that those who maintain these beliefs would definitely
come together as a community to protect the species if it is faced with a threat. This Directory has
not documented such widespread belief systems.
We do realise that the above definition is not very sharp and contains non-quantified terms such
as ‘substantial human influence’ and ‘significant biodiversity value‘. However, some openness in
the definition is in the very nature of our current incomplete understanding of this phenomenon and
of its sheer diversity. We hope these terms will become more sharply defined as this understanding
grows. Rather than a concept to be defined, our experience reveals that CCAs need to be seen
as a philosophy of biodiversity conservation based on transparency and participation,
a philosophy that is open to a vast array of approaches in which, at any given time
and place, the local context would determine the most appropriate approach towards
conservation.

1.3. What criteria can be used to call an area a CCA?

For the purpose of this Directory sites which fulfill the following criteria have been considered
CCAs:
1. There is an identified group of people that can be considered a community (as defined above)
who are involved in the effort.
2. The concerned communities have substantial ethical, livelihood, cultural, economic or
spiritual associations with and dependence on the conserved area.
3. The concerned communities are the major players or among the major players in
decision-making and implementation of decisions.
4. The concerned communities have established systems (institutions, regulations, processes)
for achieving their objective.
 Overview 51

5. Irrespective of the objective of the initiative, the efforts lead towards maintenance or
enhancement of one or more natural ecosystems and species therein.
6. The effort is taking place within a locally identified boundary (even though this may not
always be very clear on a map).
In the above definitions and criteria much still needs to be sharpened and clarified. Keeping
this in mind we consider this compilation only a preliminary and baseline information on
community conservation rather than a comprehensive assessment of CCAs.

2. A categorisation of CCAs based on some of the main

characteristics21
As mentioned above CCAs are site-specific in their approach and varied in their origin. In the
following sections we attempt to analyse case studies presented in the Directory based on some
key characteristics and develop a categorisation. Note that the ‘categories’ are not necessarily
distinct, and that CCAs will not always neatly fit into one or the other category. Also to be kept in
mind is that this analysis is based on information that is not necessarily comprehensive about all
aspects of the case study.
Some of the characteristics used for defining categories are:
• Origin
• Objectives or motivations
• Area under conservation
• Ecosystems being conserved
• Management systems being followed, and
• Institutions established
Figure 1: Example of a broad categorisation based on three of many characteristics.

2.1. What are the origins of CCAs?

CCAs are either initiated by local communities on their own without any external help, or external
individuals and institutions have played an important role in initiating the process. The latter
could be either on a request from the local communities themselves, or an NGO or a government
agency on their own responding to local situations. Objectives for initiation could vary under both
categories (see Section 2.2 on objectives of CCAs). It is sometimes difficult to locate the origin,
especially in older CCAs, which could be a combination of many factors such as a need being
felt in the community to revive a dying tradition, concern for depleting biodiversity, and these
factors coinciding with the emergence of an inspiring local leadership. Sometimes the origin may
well be a mix of internal and external factors, e.g., a young person from the community who has
studied outside and brings back new ideas (the youth representing internal factors but influenced
by external factors such as education). Our classification in Figure 2 is based on ‘who the main
initiators’ are, irrespective of the direct or indirect influences that motivated them.
52 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

Figure 2: Origin of CCAs

i) Self-Initiated
These include community conservation efforts initiated by the communities entirely or primarily
on their own. Such initiatives may be influenced by a number of factors as mentioned in Box 5.
Such initiatives could be:
Continuation of traditional practices: This is usually an old practice, the roots of which are difficult
to trace. It is difficult to say how this practice began but communities are continuing with it. This
continuation of the practice could also be with or without particular objectives or reasons, e.g.
protection of birds in numerous heronries across the country.
Initiated by a local individual: One or two members of the community are motivated by local
factors or influenced by factors mentioned in Box 5. Usually these are started as village discussions
on issues such as resource scarcity, water depletion, reducing crop fertility, forest degradation,
external development-related threats, concern for the species or habitats and so on. Examples
include Saigata in Maharashtra, Jardhargaon in Uttarakhand, Ghusuria and Jharsuguda in Orissa.
Examples such as Binjgiri Hills in Orissa and Sangti Valley in Arunachal clearly highlight role played
by local conservation-oriented individuals or local schoolteachers in initiating conservation efforts.
These individuals are often able to inspire and influence a large number of people and villages
because of their neutral position and the respect that they command locally.
Initiated by a group of individuals from within the community or community as a whole: In
many instances a group of individuals from the community, influenced by various factors, start
conservation efforts on their own. This group may bring their concern to the entire community
or the gram sabha for discussion and with the consent of the entire sabha decide to initiate
conservation efforts. Such groups often include the local village youths, church groups, women’s
groups or groups of respected elders, e.g. several CCAs in Nagaland.

Box 5
Influences and inspirations behind CCAs
It is not inevitable that communities facing resource scarcity or ecological hardships would
initiate conservation efforts collectively on their own. However, often it is some influence
or catalysts that triggers off the conservation effort. Some such influences or catalysts are
mentioned below:
Spiritual and social movements: CCAs initiated under the influence of spiritual or social
movements include, villages such as Hiware Bazar in Maharashtra which was influenced by
the neighbouring Ralegaon Siddhi village and its legendary leader Anna Hazare. The success
of Ralegaon Siddhi led to the Government of Maharashtra announcing an award for model
villages under a scheme called the Adarsh Gaon Yojana (Model Village Scheme)22, inspiring
many villages. Similarly veteran leader Baba Amte, and the Bhoodan Gramdan Movement23
have inspired many communities. Some young students in the late 1970s were influenced by
Jayaprakash Narayan (political and social leader) and his philosophy of using youth power for
social upliftment in India. A number of individuals who subsequently spread out to various
 Overview 53

parts of the country and played important role in initiating social and ecological movements
were part of his Chhatra Yuva Sangharsh Vahini (a youth social movement).
As mentioned in Section 1.1, in recent times many communities have had to stand up and
fight against strong commercial or developmental forces threatening their livelihood resources.
These movements may die down or subside once the conflict is resolved, but have sometimes
resulted in reviving the communities’ faith in cohesive community efforts. Consequently they
have lead to collective efforts towards achieving social justice and/or better management of
natural resources. Such cases include,
Mendha (Lekha) in Maharashtra, where the movement towards tribal self-rule and forest
conservation was a result of a larger struggle against a hydro-electric project; and natural
resource and traditional seed conservation in Jardhargaon was an outcome of the famous
Chipko movement in the hills of Garhwal in Uttarakhand.
Other CCAs or neighbouring villages: In some villages in Orissa, Uttarakhand, Maharashtra,
Rajasthan and other parts of the country the conservation effort was initiated after being
influenced by similar efforts in neighbouring villages. There are examples where the benefits
resulting from conservation efforts in one village has inspired others to conserve. There are also
examples where conservation in one village meant restrictions on use by others, or conserving
villagers going to the non-protected forests of other villagers to meet their own needs. In the
latter circumstances the neighbours initiated conservation to ensure that their resources are
not degraded while others protect their own.
Other Influences: The influence of researchers who come to a village, or radio and TV programmes
are also common factors influencing villagers to initiate conservation.

Figure 3: Agency that inspired the origin

Fifty six per cent of all initiatives described in this Directory have been initiated in recent times
by the communities on their own (Figure 3). 26 per cent have always been part of a culture and
tradition and are continued by the communities, while 17 per cent have been initiated with the help
of NGOs, 3 per cent by government agencies or individuals.
ii) Externally initiated
By external we mean agents outside of the conserving community.
Initiated with the help of NGOs/NGIs:
These are cases where an NGO or NGI from outside the community has directly influenced the
natural resource conservation process. The association of the NGO/NGI could be for the following
reasons:
1. A new initiative as part of a larger natural resource conservation programmes aimed at
overcoming a resource availability crisis, to fight against social injustice, to work for conservation
of biodiversity. For example, WWF-India24 in Arunachal and Samrakshan25 in Meghalaya and
Mizoram.
54 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

2. Intervention to revive a lost tradition or support a continuing tradition, e.g., the regeneration
of river Arvari in Rajasthan, through the revival of the system of johads (checkdams) facilitated
by the local NGO, Tarun Bharat Sangh.

Initiated as part of state-sponsored programmes or by individual government officials:

In some areas sensitive government officials have played a crucial role in starting successful
community conservation initiatives. The credit for the Indian government adopting the joint forest
management (JFM)26 programme goes as much to forest officials as to the local communities.
Even in the government schemes and programmes that adopt a participatory approach in natural
resource management, it is the sensitive and interested officials who are responsible for the extent
of the success of these programmes. For example success of JFM in Satara Tukum in Maharashtra
was because of the sensitive forest staff that was posted there at the time. 27 Similarly, the North
Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas (NERCORMP) is a joint
project of the Government of India and International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD).
This programme has also helped revive or initiate many community conservation efforts in north-
eastern India.

2.2. What are the main objectives of CCAs?

Communities appear to have a range of objectives for which they conserve biodiversity, indeed
the primary objective is not necessarily always biodiversity conservation. Some of these objectives
are described below. Figure 4 given below also analyses 120 case studies from the Directory to
understand what are the major objectives:
Resource enhancement and/or maintenance: Communities facing a serious scarcity of fuelwood,
fodder, timber for household needs, medicinal plants could start an effort towards conservation
and sustainable management of surrounding ecosystem. In some situations where resources have
not already degraded, communities start such efforts to ensure continued availability. For example
the sanctified van panchayat forests in Uttarakhand, community conserved forests inside Kailadevi
Wildlife Sanctuary in Rajasthan, Jardhargaon in Uttarakhand, many community forest management
(CFM) villages in Orissa and West Bengal (some of which subsequently became a part of the official
JFM scheme)28. The analysis shown in Figure 4 below indicates that resource enhancement and
maintenance is one of the highest motivations for communities to start conservation at 77 (64 per
cent) sites.
To counter ecological threats: Communities facing ecological threats or hardships such as
reduced soil fertility because of erosion; frequent landslides; recurring drought situations; reduced
or non-availability of water because of degraded watersheds; and impacts of cyclones along the
coastal areas and other natural calamities. Examples include Hunsur village in Karnataka, and
Konark-Balukhand in Orissa. In Khambi village in Manipur, if villagers had not regenerated their
forests they would have had to relocate their village because of water scarcity. 2.5 per cent of the
cases were motivated to take action because of ecological hardships.
To fight external development threats: Impending threats from development or commercial
forces, or alienation from the resource/habitat on which the community’s livelihood depends.
Examples include the Chipko Movement (against timber logging) Uttarakhand and Mendha (Lekha)
village (against dams and a paper mill) in Maharashtra.
Religious sentiments: Religious sentiments associated with species, sacred landscapes and other
elements. Examples include sacred groves like Ajeevali village in Maharashtra, wildlife protection
by the Bishnois in Rajasthan, sacred landscapes of Sikkim, and sacred ponds and forests of
Uttarakhand. Nine percent of the analysed CCAs had religious sentiments as the major objective.
Cultural concerns and traditional systems: There are many traditional and cultural practices
which are not necessarily linked to religious sentiments, but to ethics or cultural beliefs. Examples
include community land-use systems in the north east India, and heronries in villages like Kokkare
Bellur in Karnataka. Figure 4 indicates that religious and cultural sentiments together are responsible
for motivating 28 (22.5 per cent) of CCAs.
Political reasons: A larger movement towards self-rule and local empowerment where rights
and responsibilities over natural ecosystems and species therein are considered very much a part
of all other rights and responsibilities of the local inhabitants in the concerned area. Examples
include Mendha (Lekha) in Maharashtra, and Kudada in Bihar. 3 per cent of the CCAs were initiated
because of a movement towards self-rule, or had political assertion as one of their objectives.
 Overview 55

Biodiversity concerns: In recent times, there is a realization among the youth in many villages
about the threatened status of wild species are found in their area. For example, there are a
number of villagers along the coasts of Goa, Kerala and Orissa who are extending protection to
marine turtles. Such protection is also often given to many other species and habitats as part of
tradition, for example protection of fish and fresh water turtles. In these situations the attention is
more on the protection of the specific species and only occasionally is the habitat or other species in
that area taken into consideration. However, conservation of the habitat as a whole for a particular
species, is also not uncommon. For example wildlife reserves in Nagaland, and Shankarghola in
Assam and a few more in the other north-eastern states of India. (for more details on these see
Section 4.3). As per Figure 4, the second highest motivation for CCAs appears to be the concern
for certain species and their degrading habitat. This accounts for 33 (27.5 per cent) of the cases.
(Interestingly, 58 per cent of these 33 have their roots in strong cultural and religious sentiments,
while 42 per cent have been initiated in recent times out of concern for wildlife).
Other external human threats: Threat from human factors such as government deciding to
harvest timber or carry out plantations of only commercially important species at the expense of
local ones, increased activities of timber smugglers, increased activities of migratory herders, etc.
have been responsible for initiating 5 (4 per cent) of the CCAs.
Economic reasons: Economic reasons have been one of the motivating factors behind eight (6
per cent) of the cases. This does not mean that economic benefits are not welcome in other cases
or that such benefits do not accrue but that this is not often the main motivation behind starting
an initiative.
Figure 4: Objectives and motivations behind CCAs

It is important to mention here that any one of the above mentioned case studies could have
more than one objective for initiating conservation efforts. For example, communities could
start conservation with the objective of resource enhancement as well as to overcome ecological
hardships and protecting some endangered species.

2.3. Are the management practices new or old?

CCAs can be classified based on whether the management practices adopted for the CCAs are
traditional (old) or new. Traditional practices can be those that are continuing without a break or
those which had broken down and were subsequently revived. By traditional or old practices we
mean those practices whose time of origin and often even the rationale cannot be traced by anyone
in the community, while new practices are those where the time of origin exists in the memory
of the community. It is important to mention that most traditional practices, whether continuing
or revived, do get modified over a period of time depending on the changing circumstances and
situations.
56 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

Figure 5: Old or new management practices

a. Continuing traditional practices

An analysis of 116 CCAs shown in Figure 5 indicates that in 22 per cent of the documented
CCAs, traditional conservation and management practices are being followed. These could be in
their original form or with modifications. Examples include heronries, Indian peafowl conservation,
blackbuck conservation, and sacred groves.

b. Revived traditional practices

Figure 5 also shows that in 16 per cent of the documented cases, the management practices
that were adopted were revived traditions that had once broken down. This is irrespective of who
initiated the process—the communities themselves, NGOs or government agencies, or individuals.
For example, in many instances there existed in the past a system of the entire village selecting a
few respected and elderly people (for e.g. gaon buras in many north eastern states) in the village
as village heads to resolve conflicts and take decisions. In some cases village assemblies as a
whole (gram sabhas) used to take decisions. When villagers or NGOs are in the process of initiating
a conservation effort they often look into the history of the community itself to arrive at the best
system of decision-making for that area, e.g. by trying to revive the role of village elders.
Similarly the past is sometimes explored when solutions are needed for recurring problems. For
example, in areas with water shortage, conserving communities or associated NGOs have looked
at traditional systems of water harvesting in the area and tried to revive them with or without
modifications.

Box 6
Reviving tradition out of necessity
In the Himalayan State of Uttarakhand, villagers have been legally in charge of surrounding
or adjoining forests for over seven decades. The local van panchayats (forest councils) were
entrusted with the management of forests. With the burgeoning populations, reducing resources,
and monoculture plantations in the surrounding government controlled forests, van panchayats
were increasingly finding it difficult to sustainably manage the forests. Consequently many van
panchayats decided to revive the tradition of sacred groves and declared the forests under their
management sacred for a specified period of time to allow for their regeneration. After five (in
some cases ten) years, the results are extremely encouraging, e.g., in the Dharamghar region
of Uttarakhand (see case study section of Uttarakhand).

c. New management systems

According to Figure 5, the highest number of examples, at 62 per cent, are from CCAs where
new management practices have been devised after the decision to conserve. This challenges the
common belief that community conservation efforts are only in those areas where they have existed
traditionally. New community conservation initiatives are continuously emerging. Examples of this
are turtle conservation at Rushikulya in Orissa, CCAs in Nagaland, Satara Tukum and Saigata in
Maharashtra and many others.
 Overview 57

2.4. How much area do CCAs conserve?

It is generally believed that communities, if and when they conserve natural resources and
biodiversity, do so only in small and sporadic patches. This may be true if one considers only
those areas as CCAs which communities have set aside as completely no-use zones, such as a few
sacred groves. However when a diversity of initiatives are considered (such as in this Directory),
with a huge range of objectives (Section 2.2) and institutional arrangements (Section 2.6), this
does not hold true. Conservation in such examples is achieved through a continuum of land-use
practices ranging from areas of no human use to areas of regulated multiple use. Resources cannot
be sustained if the area on which communities are dependent and are conserving is very small.
It is therefore logical that, given an option, communities would want to bring larger areas with
multiple-use systems under CCAs (This reality has been reflected in Figure 6). This indicates that
conservation requires a landscape approach with management taking into account high human
use, low human use and no use.
Figure 6: Range of area within which the documented CCAs fall

Over one third of the CCAs (37 per cent), recorded in this Directory are conserving areas between
100 to 1000ha, and 16 per cent over 1000ha.
In states like Nagaland, where communities own much larger landscapes, the size of a few no-
use zones (declared in last couple of decades) meant exclusively for wildlife protection is also
large. But the situation is different in rest of India. Here the populations are rising and available
resources are shrinking, so sacred groves (which are usually inviolate with no or minimal use)
become smaller and smaller in size. It is therefore important that CCAs including sacred groves
are not seen as isolated entities but as part of the larger landscape, and effective management of
the surrounding landscape is also given as much importance for conservation as the conserved site
(with varying degrees of use-regulation).

2.5. Who owns the lands on which CCAs exist?

Our experience with CCAs in India shows that existence of CCAs is often not dependent on
the ownership of land. CCAs documented here were found to be existing on lands owned by
communities, government agencies, or even disputed lands (disputes could be among various
communities or between communities and government agencies). The analysis in Figure 7 shows
that 53 per cent of the CCAs exist on government-owned lands.
Figure 7: Who owns the lands on which CCAs exist?
58 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

In 22 per cent of the CCAs, the ownership status is not known but it is likely that many of
these would also be on the government lands. Only about 12 per cent of the CCAs are on lands
owned privately or by the community as a whole. Most of these are in Nagaland (which is the only
state in the country where almost all the land is owned by communities or individuals), or are in
areas like the Bishnoi lands in Punjab and Rajasthan. This could be because land and forests are
largely owned by the government in most parts of the country. Some of the state chapters in
this Directory deal extensively with the history of nationalization of land by the colonial and post-
colonial governments (see chapters on Uttarakhand, Himachal and Karnataka).
In many such areas where CCAs exist, even when owned by the government, communities
have had traditional or customary rights and associations for generations. Sometimes such rights
have been accepted and recorded in the government documents, such as the nistar 29rights of the
erstwhile Central Provinces and Berar region (now forming parts of Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh,
and Madhya Pradesh). However, in most cases these rights have neither been recognized nor
recorded. Conservation efforts on such government lands are initiated by first claiming a de
facto control within their own traditional boundaries. Such boundaries are often not part of any
government records but are strongly embedded in local oral traditions and historical and cultural
memories. Traditionally, these areas have been divided among the resident villages, defined
largely by the drainage patterns, rivers, mountains and so on. However, since these are unofficial
boundaries there are no physical demarcations of such traditional boundaries on the ground.
Nowadays, this sometimes gives rise to conflicts with neighbouring communities. Such conflicts
are more pronounced in areas where land has been taken over by the government in the past and
redistributed for usufruct30 rights (without recognizing the original boundaries)—e.g., in the case
of van panchayats in Uttarakhand.

2.6. What institutions are commonly used for conservation?

CCAs use a variety of institutions to fulfil their objectives. These range from a single institution
for all decisions in a village (including the ones related to conservation) to multiple institutions
established for different purposes. Some of the commonly used institutions are mentioned below.
It is important to keep in mind that the categorization (as mentioned below) is not hard and fast—
local variations within each of the categories is encountered from community to community.

2.6.1. Village as a whole (gram sabha/aam sabha or village assembly)

In such CCAs the village as a whole makes the decisions about the initiative and is also collectively
responsible for implementing them. Usually in such examples the village assembly or council
meets at regular intervals (periodicity and regularity varies from case to case). In most such
examples, the presence of a certain minimum number of members is compulsory. Who constitutes
a council or assembly also varies from case to case. In some cases it is the entire voting population
(or all adults) of the village, while in others it could be one member per family. In a few cases
participation of women is compulsory and encouraged by the men in the village, while in others
women are not allowed to participate in gram sabha meetings. Even if in the government revenue
records the conserving village or hamlet is a part of another larger village or group of villages,
the conserving community often considers its gram sabha to be separate from that of the larger
village and decisions are made at their own level. The role of the gram sabhas is taken over by
the village councils (VC) in Nagaland. VCs are a combination of a traditional institutional structure,
officially accepted in a modified form (see Nagaland state chapter for more details). Under the
Village Council Act of the state, all decisions related to the village governance, including forest and
other natural resources, are taken by the village council.
In some cases a village may decide that the matters related to forests and conservation would
be handled by the van suraksha samiti (VSS) or forest protection committee (FPCs) in the village.
However, the composition of the VSS is exactly the same as that of the gram sabha—the distinction
here is that in VSS meetings only matters related to the forests are discussed.
CCAs which are also part of JFM follow the official JFM structure. They have a general body
constituted of either one member per family, or one male and one female member per family,
depending on the state. For day to day matters an executive committee is elected, usually
comprising of 7-9 members from the general body. The local forest officer is the member secretary
of the VSS. It is mandatory to have members from underprivileged communities and women in this
committee. In villages like Mendha (Lekha) in Maharashtra, the VSS executive appointed under
JFM exists only on paper and decisions are made by the entire gram sabha, which meets once a
month or more.
 Overview 59

The term ‘entire community’ can also refer to a specific group of people interacting with a
common resource and informally coming together for use, management and conservation of the
resource. For instance, all the clam collectors in Ashtamudi lake in Kerala have formed an informal
group that decides on how the clams should be caught and when a ban on fishing should be
implemented. This group ensures that fishing ban orders are issued by the District Collector at an
appropriate time every year.

2.6.2. A representative body/ies

This could be of the following kinds:
i. Set up by the entire village, gram sabha, or village council: In these cases the entire
village decides to elect or select a few members to take decisions related to conservation. It is
important to keep in mind that the reality on ground may vary from case to case. For example,
in some situations the institutions mentioned below may have actual decision-making powers,
while in others they may have the responsibility only of implementing the decisions. In still
others they may be mandated to make some decisions but not all. Various categories under this
could be the following:
• A few respected elders in the community who meet as and when required. Usually, they play
an important role in conflict resolution within the community.
• Specific institutions selected/elected by the village, such as the van panchayats of Uttarakhand,
for management and conservation of forests.
• A van suraksha samiti (VSS) but not under JFM. In such cases too there is a huge diversity
in representation and equity. Some villages are very careful about equitable participation
and ensure presence of women and representatives from minority groups, while in other
such institutions powerful individuals dominate, and women and minorities have nearly no
role to play. However, wherever the VSS is more equitable, the community initiative appears
to be more successful. In some cases, even when decisions are made by the dominant
communities the needs of the minority groups or underprivileged groups are given special
consideration, e.g., Binjgiri Hills in Orissa.
• Sometimes, when the village is very large the community decides to notionally divide the
forests for management and use among various sub groups. The institutional arrangements
of these smaller units may vary from each other. In Makku village in Uttarakhand, the van
panchayat is managing over 2000 ha of forest. The village decided to divide some patches
of forests closer to the village among women’s groups for management and use. The forests
further away from the village are protected and managed by the van panchayat.
• Wildlife Management Committees instituted for the protection of wildlife such as in Sendenyu
village and Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Trust (KNCT) in Nagaland.
• Women’s groups, which either come together organically with village consent or are elected
by the village, are taking the lead in conservation efforts in many parts of Uttarakhand,
Orissa and other states. In Dengajhari (Orissa), and in Ganeshpura and Karundamuda
(Chhattisgarh), forest protection is entirely the responsibility of women’s groups. In other
villages such as Jardhargaon in Uttarakhand and Mendha (Lekha) in Maharashtra, women’s
groups are an important part of the decision-making process and in implementation of CCA
rules.
• Youth groups in many areas are concerned about the threatened species or habitat and are
taking a lead in initiating action towards conservation. In most cases, however, their role is
more about ensuring protection and making sure that the rules and regulations are being
followed rather than about taking decisions—e.g., Luzuphuhu, Ghosu and some other CCAs
in Nagaland. These youth groups are often responsible for a number of other village-related
issues apart from forest protection.
• As in the case of Rupabalia in Orissa, management of different patches of forests can be a
responsibility of different caste communities.
ii. Set up by an external agency: This could include a representative body that has been
constituted by an NGO, government agency or any other agency for the purpose of a conservation
programme initiated by them. Such institutions could be functioning independently but with the
acceptance of the local community31. These could also be the representative bodies, which
have been formed with the consent of the traditional institutions. Examples of such institutions
include:
60 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

• A few members elected as per the JFM resolution of the state governments to constitute
the executive committee of the VSS, usually about 7-9 people. The forest department (FD)
plays a crucial role in such selections.
• Natural resource management group (NaRMG) formed under the International Fund for
Agricultural Development-funded North Eastern Region Community Resource Management
Project for Upland Areas (NERCORMP-IFAD).

2.6.3. Sub-unit of the larger village community but functioning independently

These could again be those that have set themselves up with or without external help or that were
set up by the larger village but given a mandate to function independently. Examples include:
• Theeram group in Kerala working for turtle conservation and protection of the beach against
sand mining.
• Rushikulya Turtle Protection Group in Orissa.
• Kuraj Sanrakshan Vikas Sansthan working for the conservation of demoiselle cranes in Khichan
in Rajasthan.
• In cases like Binjgiri and Dahni Panch Mauja in Orissa it is seen that forest protection is started
by groups of individuals who get together organically.
• Many times the community entrusts the responsibility of managing the sacred grove to a larger
trust, e.g., Aravanchal Kavu in Kerala.
These groups work more or less independently of the decision-making process in the village.
In fact, some of them are now registered trusts or societies. They are usually not in conflict with
other village institutions and follow local rules, regulations and interests, but are not necessarily
answerable to those institutions regarding conservation-related activities.
Figure 8: Types of institutions

Analysis of existing case studies (Figure 8) shows that nearly half (46 per cent) of the CCAs use
a system of decision-making in which the village or the concerned community as a whole elects
or selects a group of people for day-to-day functioning and decision-making. The general body
in such cases meets at regular intervals (with variations from case to case) to ratify decisions,
monitor and elect or select the next executive body. In 39 per cent cases the decisions are being
made by the village as a whole and in 15 per cent of the examples, an independent sub-unit has
been formed or has formed itself.

2.7. What are the conservation systems, rules and regulations used?
Our experience with a wide range of examples, including those documented here, indicates that
the nature and kind of rules are as varied as the institutions involved in management. All CCAs
do have some kind of rules and regulations to ensure that the objectives are being met. However,
monitoring systems may vary from very stringent to fairly relaxed. Rules and regulations could
vary from very well worked-out to not so detailed out to not well-defined but well understood, and
from formally written down to orally passed on, and so on.
 Overview 61

Figure 9: Written and unwritten rules

Figure 9 shows that in 66 per cent of the documented CCAs, the communities have decided to
have written down rules while in 28 per cent cases, rules are orally followed.
Irrespective of whether these rules are written down or not, explicitly specified or not, the success
of the CCA seems to depend on how effectively these are implemented, followed, or monitored.
a. Rules and regulations
Protection through traditional beliefs is among the common systems of protection and management,
particularly in areas where traditions and religious sentiments are still very strong.
In newer initiatives, when the villagers decide to protect, they discuss a set of rules to be followed.
These rules are often not static but change according to the situation and context. Sometimes rules
are selectively relaxed. For example, in Dhani Panch Mauza in Orissa absolutely no extraction was
initially allowed, so as to ensure regeneration of forests. However, once the forests regenerated,
rules had to be changed to accommodate some local needs. Similarly, in some situations rules are
relaxed for lower-income groups.
In many cases, the communities have now started recording the minutes of the meetings where
rules and their violations are regularly recorded.
Given below are some of the most commonly used rules (various combinations of which are used
in different CCAs). Rules are framed depending upon the kind of protection to be accorded.
• Strictly no extraction of resources.
• Regulated extraction by the local villagers and absolutely no extraction by outsiders. This could
mean specifying how many cartloads of fuelwood can be extracted, how many timber trees (for
personal use only) can be felled, that only dead and dry wood can be collected for fuelwood, that
axes are not to be carried in the forests and so on.
• Permission to be sought from local institutions for any extractions.
• Regulated extraction by local villagers as well as some neighbouring villagers (especially if they
have been traditionally dependent on the same resources).
• No hunting or regulated/seasonal hunting/fishing.
• No commercial exploitation of timber.
• Using local resources to meet only local needs. Most villagers have worked out details of how
many live trees can be cut in a year and for what purposes.
• Zonation, e.g., villagers from Gadabanikilo in Orissa mark out zones for extraction, zones for
grazing, completely inviolate zones and so on.
• Specifying the number of livestock that can be kept per family in the village.
• Regulated use and equitable distribution of water, e.g., not growing water intensive crops.

b. Monitoring systems
In some situations, particularly in the case of conservation based on traditional beliefs, there
are no specified monitoring systems and no action is taken by the community if rules of entry and
62 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

resource collection are violated. It is the fear of a wrathful deity and misfortune that may befall if
rules are broken that keeps offenders away. Local people often tend to make connections between
such misfortunes and violations of traditional belief systems. Such beliefs are further strengthened
in the local folklores and mythologies. An interesting example of this is the Thaiang sacred grove
in Meghalaya, where the village elders revived the system of sacred grove protection when they
felt that disappearance of the tiger has led to misfortune for the village in the form of lack of water
and medicinal plants. The youth in the village are now strictly protecting the grove.
In the community-managed heronries, or in Bishnoi areas in Punjab and Rajasthan, or where
Indian peafowl and blackbuck are protected, there is a general understanding about not harming
the concerned species. Usually all local people adhere to the rules. A few violations may even go
unchecked, but if the frequency increases the community would come together to deal with the
situation. For example in Buguda village in Orissa (see Orissa state chapter for details), if someone
comes across incidents of blackbuck-hunting they inform the village, which gathers together to
deal with the situation.
Sometimes villagers do not have any specific monitoring system and it is the responsibility of the
entire village to keep an eye on violations and report them to the village institution. Since everyone
is more or less equally involved, violations rarely go unnoticed. There may in such situations be
a penalty even for those not reporting a violation to the community, e.g., Bhaonta-Kolyala in
Rajasthan.
One of the most commonly used systems of monitoring is that of patrolling of the CCA by rotation
as shown in Figure 10. This system is used in about 72 per cent of the documented CCAs and the
system has different names in different places. In Orissa, this is referred to as thengapalli and in
Uttarakhand as lath panchayat. Here the villagers take turns at patrolling the forests—a person
who has finished his turn places a thenga or lath (stick) outside the door of the family who then
has to take the next turn. In areas like Satara Tukum the stick is not used, but the patrolling
assignments are decided in the village meetings.
Figure 10: Resource patrolling as a monitoring system

Another commonly used system is that of appointing watchers. The village community contributes
either in kind or cash to pay the remuneration of the watchers. Contrary to common belief, the
watchers can be both men and women. The forests of Thapalia-Mehragaon in Uttarakhand were
zealously watched over by Rewati Devi (now well into her seventies) for years. In numerous
situations there are local individuals who take a keen interest in protection activities and monitoring
activities voluntarily.
Local innovations for guarding forests are quite common. In Dengajhari, for example, forest
protection against timber smugglers proved difficult for the menfolk due to threats to life. The
women then came forward and started protecting the forests in small groups. They were certain
that it would be difficult for the offenders to attack women because of social and political reasons,
and they have been proven right.

c. Fines and punishments

Rules and regulations and monitoring systems would not be effective if communities did not put
in place a system of penalties or fines for offenders. Such penalties could include social sanctions,
and fines in cash or kind, or directly confronting the offenders and confiscating what they have
extracted and tools they used.
 Overview 63

Figure 11: Penalties for violation of CCA rules

As illustrated in Figure 11, penalties in cash or kind are one of the most commonly used systems
of punishment for violation of rules and regulations with 95 (79 per cent) examples following
this system. This system is more common with offenders from within the community. 67 (56 per
cent) follow a system of direct confrontation with the offenders. Usually, confrontations are more
common with offenders from outside the community. 42 (35 per cent) CCAs follow a system of
social sanctions where the offender is socially boycotted. This is more common with habitual
offenders from within the community. Only in 5 cases (4 per cent) was the conserving community
found to have some kind of authority from the government to deal with the offenders directly.
It must be mentioned here that the fields in Figure 11 are not mutually exclusive, which means
that one community may have followed one or more of the above systems. Some commonly used
penalties are:
Fines for violations: Such fines often depend on the economic value or the value assigned by the
community to the illegally procured article. For example, sambar is considered locally threatened
in Sendenyu village in Nagaland and its hunting invites much higher fines than other species. The
fines may also vary depending on the number of times a certain offence has been committed by
the same offender, as also on the basis of the economic status of the offender, with economically
better-off people paying higher amount. Sometimes the value of fines for a certain crime changes
according to circumstances.

Box 7
Hunting fine in Khonoma, Nagaland
In Khonoma, Nagaland, villagers recount an interesting story. In order to discourage it the
village has imposed a heavy penalty on hunting wild animals. In one incident a group of
villagers had hunted a sloth bear. The village had imposed a fine of Rs 5000 on killing sloth
bears. The hunters negotiated a rate of Rs 10,000 with the trader to ensure that Rs 5000 could
be paid as a fine. The village then changed the rule such that the fine for hunting an animal is
as per its market value and also includes confiscation of the hunted animal.

• Confiscation of implements such as axes, sickles, fishing nets, used for the offence is another
common punishment.
• Compounding of livestock that stray into prohibited areas for grazing.
• Social sanctions which prohibit the individual or the family from attending any community
meetings or functions or barring them from marriage relations. Most villagers would keep away
from offences for the fear of social ostracism.
• For outside offenders and habitual offenders, the communities often seek assistance from the
FD, police or others.
• There are also instances in Orissa where offenders from the other villagers are tied to trees in
the forests till the elders of the offenders’ village come for negotiation. These elders have to
guarantee that such incidents would not be repeated.
64 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

d. Conflict Resolution
Intra-community conflicts that arise because of the implementation of the rules or for other
reasons are often resolved within the community. Such conflicts are taken outside the community
only in exceptional circumstances or when the internal unity and cohesiveness of the community
is very low. Resolution of such conflicts is usually done by the gram sabha or a group of trusted
elders.
Inter-community or inter-village conflicts are mostly resolved at inter-village/community
institutions (traditional or new). For example, in Kailadevi in Rajasthan, such conflicts are resolved
by barah gaon ki panchayat (executive committee of 12 villages). This is a traditional conflict-
resolution body where elders from 12 villages make decisions together. The offending village has
to host this meeting and bear all costs. Once a decision is taken, the respective panchayats ensure
that individual villagers adhere by it. Similarly, Mendha (Lekha) village in Maharashtra is a part of
a cluster of 32 villages that have been traditionally meeting to resolve such conflicts. In Nagaland,
all tribes have their own traditional area councils called the tribal hoho. In recent times, new area
councils such as Chakesang People’s Organisation (for the Chakesang tribe), Angami People’s
Organisation (for the Angami tribe) and so on have taken over the role of overall monitoring of
tribal affairs, including district-level conservation activities and conflict resolution. In Orissa, such
conflicts are resolved by district-level community forest management (CFM) federations, such as
Ranpur federation that consists of 180 villages.
Such institutions for inter-village disputes do not exist in all cases, and where they do not
exist, villagers largely depend on the government agencies, in particular the FD, for such conflict
resolution.

2.8. Do CCAs always exist in isolation?

Contrary to the general belief that CCAs are sporadic and isolated, the documentation reveals
that CCAs often tend to exist in clusters (see Section 7.7). The clustering of CCAs seems to be most
common under the following circumstances:
• In areas where the pressure on resources is very high and resource scarcity pushes people to
initiate conservation efforts. When one village starts protecting, it sometimes leads to higher
pressure on the forests of the others (till the resources are regenerated). The neighbours then
start protecting their forests to safeguard against over-use.
• In areas where neighbours initiate conservation after seeing the benefits of conservation for the
concerned CCA.
• In areas where leaders that have initiated the effort in one village also inspire others in the
neighbourhood to take similar steps.
• Programmes such as JFM are also often initiated in more than one village in an area.
• Large NGOs or institutions that initiate action (e.g., IFAD-NERCORMP programme in north-
eastern India) also prefer to work in more than one village in a neighbourhood at a time.
Figure 12: CCAs occurring in clusters
 Overview 65

Our analysis (Figure 12) of the documented CCAs shows that about 49 (42 per cent) exist in clusters
while 67 (58 per cent) exist in isolation or in groups of two. The trend in cluster formation is more
prominent in some regions and states. The best examples of clusters of CCAs are found in Orissa,
particularly in forest ecosystems. Nagaland, Uttarakhand and Gadchiroli district in Maharashtra also
have clusters of CCAs. Although not documented in the Directory, anecdotal accounts indicate that
such cluster formations are also found in Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand regions. The phenomenon
of clustering appears to be more common among communities conserving forest ecosystems and
species therein. The incidents of clustering of turtle conservation sites by communities in marine
areas (inspired by neighbours) are also now coming up, e.g., in Rushikulya area, and in Kerala.

2.9. Which ecosystems do CCAs cover?

Are CCAs restricted to certain kinds of ecosystems or habitats only? The documented examples
show that this is not the case, though forests seem to be the commonest. Of all the cases
documented in this Directory, the maximum pertain to forest ecosystems (more than 47 per cent).
34 per cent of CCAs exist on mixed ecosystems, which would normally contain a combination of
forests, grasslands, wetlands, and/or high-altitude pasturelands and so on.
Figure 13: Ecosystems that CCAs conserve

The third most protected ecosystem seems to be the wetlands at 11 per cent. Only 8 per cent
of CCAs documented are located in marine and other ecosystems. The reasons for this could just
be that the conservation efforts in forest areas are better known and documented than other
ecosystems, which in turn could be due to the larger number of organizations and individuals
working on forest-related issues. Anecdotal accounts and observations suggest that there is much
more happening out there, many more undocumented CCAs than what we have been able to bring
out in this compilation, particularly in ecosystems other than forests.

3. CCAs as protected areas (PAs)

As CCAs are gaining greater recognition the world over, governments and conservation
organizations are faced with the question: Can CCAs be compared to PAs and hence given equal
attention from the point of biodiversity conservation? Considering the various kinds of threats
faced by CCAs in current times (see section 5 for details), getting such recognition and support
will be valuable for many CCAs. In this section an attempt has been made to answer this question,
albeit only in the case of CCAs in India.
In India, any area can be declared a PA by the government if the government ‘considers that such
area is of adequate ecological, faunal, floral, geomorphological, natural or zoological significance,
for the purpose of protecting, propagating or developing wildlife or its environment’ under the Wild
Life (Protection) Act 1972. Cultural and other values have so far not been taken into account. The
most widely used and common categories of PAs in India are national parks and wildlife sanctuaries.
Conservation reserves and community reserves are two new categories that have been added as
per amendments in the Act in 2003 (see Section 8.1(i) on laws and policies for more details). Since
in this process there are no identified criteria based on which a PA can be declared, it is difficult
to say whether CCAs in India can fit those criteria. Additionally, declaration and management or
administration has so far been the prerogative of the government. CCAs, on the other hand, are
established by the concerned communities, based on values identified by them, and administered
66 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

with the help of local rules and regulations and through local institutions. In the absence of clear
criteria the available legal spaces could be used to review whether CCAs fit in those spaces. This
has been dealt with in greater detail in Section 7.
Internationally,32 the most commonly used definitions of a PA are those used by the International
Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
IUCN/WCPA (World Commission on PAs) defines PAs as: ‘An area of land and/or sea especially
dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated
cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means.’ CBD defines PAs as ‘A
geographically defined area which is designated or regulated and managed to achieve specific
conservation objectives.’
The key elements of PAs emerging from both these definitions are:
• Well-defined geographical limits.
• Main aim is to achieve conservation (although other related objectives or benefits are not
excluded).
• Establishment and management by legal or other effective means.
• Existence of a body of governing rules.
• A clearly identified organization or individual with governance authority.
An analysis of case studies documented in the Directory (Figure 14) indicates that 30 per cent
of the case studies fit all the key elements mentioned to be a PA (Type 1). 27 per cent fit all other
criteria except that the CCA was not initiated with the main objective of biodiversity conservation,
although biodiversity conservation could be one of the objectives and the initiative may be leading
towards conservation (Type 2). 43 per cent are such examples, where the primary objective of
the CCA may or may not be biodiversity conservation (but is one of the objectives), but they do
not fulfil at least one of the other criteria—for instance they may not have well-defined rules and
regulations rather may be working on some common understanding on what to do and what not
to do. This analysis shows that the CCAs documented in this directory, barring a few, exhibit most
of the key elements except that their main aim may not always be conservation (although the
initiative may result in conservation).

Box 8
Major points emerging from international debates on whether CCAs can be
considered PAs
Are CCAs ‘natural’ enough? IUCN’s guidance on the PA categories is that only those areas be
considered PAs in which two-thirds of the area is in its ‘natural state’ (defined as ‘ecosystems’
where since the industrial revolution (1750) human impact (a) has been no greater than that
of any other native species and (b) has not affected the ecosystem’s structure’). Many CCAs (or
for that matter PAs!) would not fulfil this criterion; however, if the CBD definition is accepted,
CCAs would certainly qualify as PAs. It can in fact be argued that a more inclusive conservation-
oriented definition may be needed to accommodate not only CCAs but also many existing PAs
and other areas that are important from a biodiversity conservation point of view, even if they
do not fulfill this ‘two-thirds’ criterion.
Do CCAs always have geographically defined boundaries?: It has been pointed out that
community conservation initiatives may be embedded in notions of ‘cultural’ spaces rather
than strict or easily delimited geographical spaces; the boundaries may shift in time, or may
be notional, ‘porous’, related to seasons and weather patterns rather than to geographical
territories (e.g., in some communities, the ‘sacred hill’ or site may shift from time to time, and
the community shifts with it). Given that one of the criteria for defining a PA is that it should
have a clearly defined boundary, does this pose problems for such CCAs coming under the PA
category? This issue is of particular relevance to special cases, such as mobile communities.
One way of resolving this may be to define, as the CCA the entire possible territory in which
the ‘shifting’ conserved site is located and then to consider appropriate internal zonation (which
can change over time) to demarcate the actually protected area within the overall CCA. Another
option is to suggest flexibility in the definition of PAs, to accommodate, in the case of CCAs,
shifting geographical boundaries which are defined by communities through cultural means. In
addition, time-related variability, i.e., the existence of seasonal patterns of protection should
be explored/accommodated.
 Overview 67

Are areas with considerable agrobiodiversity, to be considered as CCAs and indeed as

PAs? If one takes the CBD definition, such areas would fit. The latest WCPA/Cardiff Guidelines
on Category V PAs (2002) clearly includes areas with agrobiodiversity. However, acceptance of
this will need attitudinal re-orientation amongst conservation professionals, since the tendency
so far has been to focus exclusively on predominantly natural sites. There needs to be growing
recognition that in the case of many community managed areas, and especially landscape-
level CCAs, the presence and maintenance of agrobiodiversity (which also directly or indirectly
supports greater wildlife than monoculture farming/pastoralism) should be considered a positive
attribute for considering them as PAs.
Source: Note prepared by Ashish Kothari, based on inputs from Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend, Hanna Jaireth, Gonzalo
Oviedo, Adrian Phillips, and Marshall Murphree. The note was written for the IUCN Strategic Direction on Governance,
Communities, Equity and Livelihoods (TILCEPA) formerly known as the Theme on Indigenous and Local Communities,
Equity, and Protected Areas. Contact: asishkothari@vsnl.com, gbf@cenesta.org, or tilcepa@vsnl.net.

One major difference between PAs and CCAs in India is that CCAs have been established by
different communities under a diversity of rules and regulations and have been managed by a
diversity of institutions, while PAs are established under specific statutory provisions, and follow
uniform rules, regulations and institutional structures. Till the year 2002 only the FD was mandated
to manage PAs. This has legally changed with an amendment in 2003 and inclusion of community
reserves as one of the categories of PAs. However, use of this category has remained highly
restricted because of various reasons (see section 8.1 for more details). Therefore, for all practical
purposes it can safely be said that PAs in India till today continue to be managed by government
agencies (i.e., the FD), with other governance models slow to come.
Arguments in this section attempt to equate CCAs with PAs in order to emphasise two basic
points:
1. CCAs in many situations are able to resolve a number of contentious issues such as land
encroachment, resource smuggling, wildlife hunting, and achieve resource enhancement. This
indicates that if taken into account people can become strong allies in conservation programmes.
However, their strengths, weaknesses, values and limitations as explained in subsequent
sections will have to be taken into account.
2. Often CCAs fulfil many requirements of officially declared PAs, and also need to be given similar
recognition, importance and support. However, if CCAs are to be formally accepted as a model
of conservation in the country and recognized as PAs, then much effort will be required towards
resolving the issues related to the responsibilities, access and rights of the local communities
in these areas as also in recognizing and maintaining their diversity (as detailed in Section 7).
CCAs cannot be managed in the same exclusionary manner in which PAs have been managed
in India so far.33
The situation mentioned in point 2 above can be resolved by looking at recent discussions about
the six PA categories of the IUCN. The categorization here is based on the objective of the protected
area. However there is an active proposal to add a ‘governance’ dimension to this category
system. This essentially means that categorisation of PAs would remain as per the objectives,
but management of such PAs could be either by the government or by the communities or a
collaboration of one or more organisations depending upon the local situation34. The acceptance
of this proposal would add weight to the increasing demands of including non-official conservation
areas that are being managed by agencies other than the government in national PA systems.
Following on from this, a table can be formulated with CCA types that could fit into each of the 6
IUCN PA categories (for international discussions on this see www.tilcepa.org).
68 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

Table 1: CCAs in India that can potentially be included under various IUCN PA
categories.35

IUCN Description CCA type that could fit Potential CCA , some
Category in this (with suggested examples
interpretation and variations
that would facilitate their
inclusion)
Ia & 1b Strict Nature Reserve: Sacred/forbidden or otherwise • Khonoma Nature Conservation
PA managed mainly ‘no-use’ groves, lakes, springs, and Tragopan sanctuary,
for scientific purposes mountains, islands, etc. with Nagaland
or wilderness prohibition on uses except very • Sendenyu wildlife reserve,
protection particular occasions, such as a once- Nagaland
a-year ceremony (IUCN definition • Chusana Island, Gujarat
Wilderness Area: PA may need to be expanded to include
managed mainly for cultural and/or religious aims, as
wilderness protection these may often be the main reasons
Absolutely no use for the communities to protect many
allowed except areas with such strictness)
research in 1a.
II National Park: PA Sacred/forbidden or otherwise • Chakrashila Sanctuary, Assam
managed mainly for ‘minimal-use’ areas (as above) with • Shankarghola, Assam
ecosystem protection minimal and strictly regulated use
• Longwood Shola, Tamil Nadu
and recreation (collection of dry and fallen wood,
collection of sap, eco-tourism, etc.) • Tuofema village forest reserve,
Nagaland
III Natural Monument: Natural monuments (caves,
PA managed mainly waterfalls, cliffs, rocks) that are
for conservation protected by communities for
of specific natural religious, cultural, or other reasons
features
IV Habitat/Species Heronries and other village tanks, • Nellapatu heronry, Andhra
Management Area: turtle nesting sites, community Pradesh
PA managed mainly managed wildlife corridors and • Uppalapadu heronry, Andhra
for conservation riparian vegetation areas Pradesh
through management • Rushikulya (sea turtles),
intervention Manglajodi (waterfowl), and
Buguda (blackbuck), Orissa
• Khichan (demoiselle cranes),
Rajasthan
V Protected Landscape/ Traditional grounds of pastoral • Apatani Valley, Arunachal
Seascape: PA communities/mobile peoples, • Arvari Sansad area (River
managed mainly for including rangelands, water points catchment landscape),
landscape/seascape and forest patches strongly inter- Rajasthan
conservation and dependent for herd, ecosystem • Lands of the Chagpa’s of
recreation. and cultural survival; sacred and Ladakh
cultural landscapes and seascapes,
• Sacred landscapes of Sikkim
collectively managed river basins
Range, Orissa
(such natural and& cultural
ecosystems have multiple land/water
uses integrated into each other, and
given a context by the overall sacred/
cultural/ productive nature of the
ecosystem; they would include areas
with high agricultural biodiversity)
VI Managed Resource Resource reserves (forests, Jardhargaon, Uttarakhand
PA: PA managed grasslands, waterways, coastal
• Mendha (Lekha), Maharashtra
mainly for the and marine stretches, including
sustainable use of wildlife habitats) under restricted • Behroonguda, Andhra Pradesh
natural ecosystems. use and communal rules that assure • Hiware Bazar, Maharashtra
sustainable harvesting through time
(Nearly all cases mentioned in section
2.2 under resource enhancement and
maintenance)
Source: Adapted for India from a table presented in a note prepared by Ashish Kothari, based on inputs from Grazia
Borrini-Feyerabend, Hanna Jaireth, Gonzalo Oviedo, Adrian Phillips, and Marshall Murphree. The original table was
for the IUCN Strategic Direction on Governance, Communities, Equity and Livelihoods (TILCEPA) formerly known as
the Theme on Indigenous and Local Communities, Equity, and Protected Areas. Contact: ashishkothari@vsnl.com,
gbf@cenesta.org, or tilcepa@vsnl.net.
 Overview 69

4. Impacts of CCAs
4.1. What costs do CCAs entail for communities?
It is now well established that people living closest to conserved areas or protected areas pay
the highest price for achieving conservation, willingly or unwillingly36. Conservation does not come
without a cost even when it is being done by communities themselves. Many times communities
consider these costs integral to their efforts while at other times the costs begin to impact the
sustainability of the initiative and communities even look for help to counter them. Some of the
major costs incurred by communities from CCAs include:
• Investment of time and effort for protection, management and planning activities: Most
of the communities involved in conservation activities are subsistence farmers, forest produce
collectors, fishers and other economically underprivileged people. They must work everyday on
their farms or forests, wetlands or pastures, or be engaged in daily wage activities, to be able
to sustain family incomes. In these situations, giving a certain number of days for conservation
activities (including patrolling, meetings, and at times even court cases, etc.) can have a serious
impact on the family’s income. The situation is more serious for families where there is only one
earning member or which is constituted of widows or old men and women (see Section 6.2 on
social limitations for more details).
• Investment of funds for salaries or corpus conservation fund: Some communities have
taken a decision to contribute a certain percentage of their earnings to pay for the conservation
effort, mainly to avoid being dependent on external sources for funding or to be able to sustain
the efforts irrespective of external support. These contributions are meant for carrying out various
management activities or payments to the watchers and guards, and so on.
• Temporary loss of access to natural resources: When the objective of management is
regeneration of natural resources, villagers have to face self-imposed restrictions and hence
scarcity of resources for a few years till their resources have regenerated. Such restrictions
again affect those who are more dependent on the resources, such as women, artisans, and
pastoralists (see Section 6.2 on social limitations for more details).
• Donation of private lands for conservation: In states like Nagaland and in areas belonging
to Bishnoi community, privately owned lands or community lands have been donated for
conservation. Often there is little or no compensation for such donations, which are done for the
larger good of the community, either willingly or under community pressure.
• Conflict situations with neighbours or migrating communities: Once communities start
protection, they need to clearly identify the boundaries within their jurisdiction. Since traditional
boundaries in many areas have not been recognised in government records and these are the
boundaries that villagers claim for protection, it gives rise to conflicts with other villagers who
may also be extracting resources from the same area. Sometimes conflicts may also arise
between two conserving communities. Conflicts between migratory communities and settled
communities (which in the past had traditional tie-ups) are among the highest (see the case
study on Buldhana in Maharashtra for details). In many situations where the conserved land is
owned by the government, conflicts with government agencies are also common.
• Threat to life and property: Many communities carry out conservation under grave threat to
their lives from those engaged in illegal timber trade, poaching and so on. In some situations
conservation continues despite no support in such circumstances from the government or any
other agency (e.g., see case study on Dengajheri in Orissa).
• Increased crop depredation due to increase in wild animal populations: In villages like
Jardhargaon in Uttarakhand, Bishnoi villages in Punjab, Buguda village in Orissa (see Orissa
state chapter for details) and Khonoma in Nagaland , crop depredation by wild animals is a major
problem faced by the villagers. In Buguda, villagers claim to be not able to cultivate about 60 per
cent of cultivable land because of crop damage. In Jardhargaon, monkeys and wild boars cause
serious damage to the crops (also see Section 6.1. on ecological limitations).
• Loss of livelihood opportunities: Youth involved in the conservation of olive ridley turtles
in Rushikulya in Orissa or Kolavipaalam in Kerala need to put in their entire time in issues
related to conservation. They are left with little time to engage in livelihood generation activities
and turtle conservation does not earn them any livelihood. When the pressure to generate a
livelihood begins to mount, this often becomes a reason for abandoning conservation activities,
such as at Morjim Beach in Goa, where the initiative of the youth for protecting turtles has been
overwhelmed by huge tourism-related investments and other activities.37
70 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

• Opportunity cost or other economic cost: In many heronries (e.g. Kokkare Bellur in Karnataka),
villagers have to let go of the harvest from tamarind trees if the storks and pelicans happen to be
nesting on those trees. In Khichan village in Rajasthan, villagers contribute thousands of rupees
to be able to buy grains for the demoiselle cranes.

4.2 How do communities benefit from conservation?

Our analysis indicates that most communities have benefited from the conservation initiative
economically, politically,38 in terms of developmental inputs, and so on. However, with the available
information it has not been possible to carry out a cost-benefit analysis to see in how many cases
the benefits have outweighed the costs.
Figure 16: Benefits to the communities39

Note: Each CCA used in the analysis above has more than one benefit

Benefits envisaged by the communities from the CCAs include livelihood security, ecological
benefits such as control of soil erosion and increased availability of water, community empowerment,
social recognition, among others.
a. Long term availability of biomass
One of the most important benefits for communities is sustained availability and access to
biomass that the communities require for survival. Communities are willing to face self-imposed
restrictions, as this would result in regeneration of and subsequent sustained access to resources,
or because they would help achieve cultural, ethical, or religious goals. This is true of almost all the
examples mentioned in this directory. Women who often face the brunt of conservation most often
do follow restrictions to the extent possible in the hope of eventual gain. Figure 16 shows that
nearly 83 per cent of the conserving initiatives have led to long-term availability of resources.

b. Financial and employment related benefits

Economic benefits from the sale of surplus resources or other ecosystem-based activities such
as eco-tourism are an important benefit for many communities. Villagers in Botha and Hiware
Bazar in Maharashtra and many others have regenerated their grasslands and are now generating
substantial income by selling surplus grass. In Mendha (Lekha), villagers have worked out a system
by which the village institution is now in a position to provide year-round employment to the
villagers, thus reducing the need to move out in search of employment. In Bhaonta-Kolyala twin
villages in Rajasthan, most young men would migrate out in search of employment till a decade
ago. Conservation of surrounding forests has not only ensured year-round availability of water (in
this drought-prone area) but has also increased soil fertility. Agriculture is now so beneficial that
the village has much less out-migration for employment.
Figure 16 shows that in 62 (52 per cent) of cases there is a direct financial benefit to the village/
community as a whole (towards village fund) and/or to a majority of the community members.
About 22 (18 per cent) of the CCAs have managed to ensure some year-round employment for
most people in the village. In many initiatives (not included in the 18 per cent), employment
opportunities have improved but only for a few people in the community.
The following two categories of benefits do not reflect in the Figure above as they are difficult to
quantify, however discussions with the conserving communities reveal that these are important
benefits for the communities.
 Overview 71

c. Social and cultural benefits

Community cohesiveness: Conservation efforts often bring the community together for a
common cause or are a result of communities coming together for some other cause. A more
informed, organised and empowered community could work towards establishing more locally
appropriate development processes in the village, such as systems of education, health and finance.
An example of this is Hiware Bazar in Maharashtra, where the village organisation takes care of the
education of meritorious village youth, the health of the village community, among other things.
On the other hand cohesiveness is one of the requisites for conservation efforts; otherwise
serious problems can be created from people within the group. This is illustrated by the example of
Jharbeda village in Orissa. This example however also shows that if there is determination among
the community members, conservation can be achieved despite all opposition. Orissa also has
many examples where women have stood against all odds to protect their forests.
Social recognition: Under the current development paradigm the local communities, their
efforts, knowledge systems and technological innovations remain unappreciated and unrecognised.
Decades of lack of recognition and endorsement has instilled a feeling of inferiority among local
knowledge holders and innovators. Often the conservation efforts draw the attention of the national
and global community towards the local communities, leading to social recognition of their efforts.
Initiatives such as Jardhargaon, Mendha (Lekha) and Bhaonta-Kolyala have received national and
global recognition. Some like Hiware Bazar and Saigata in Maharashtra have received official
government awards, strengthening their resolve to continue.
Overcoming social inequities: Saigata village in Maharashtra has seven castes and classes,
many of them socially and economically disprivileged. Forest conservation initiated by a dalit
youth helped in bringing various castes in the village together. An equal sharing of conservation
and protection responsibilities eventually led to equitable sharing of resources, thus improving
the status of the downtrodden in the village. This may not be the situation in all CCAs but it
shows the potential of conservation efforts in facilitating reduction in social inequities. Another
example of socially disempowered sections of society gaining power because of forest conservation
is Dengajheri and surrounding villages in Orissa. Here forest conservation and decisions related
to the forests are largely the responsibility of the women. Consequently women, who had never
travelled outside their village, have now developed the capacity to not only make decisions about
the forests but also to represent the village in the Ranpur Federation (see Orissa chapter for
details). The status of women is such that they also play an important role in general village level
decision-making, which is traditionally a forbidden territory for women. The same has happened in
a number of Chipko movement-inspired CCAs in Uttarakhand.

d. Political benefits
Changes in political dynamics reflect both the relationship of the community vis-à-vis outside
agencies, including the government and the relationship between the dominant and the
underprivileged sections of the community. Although not reflected in the analysis in Figure 16
many communities benefit politically from their coming together to manage and/or conserve the
surrounding natural resources.
In tribal-dominated areas, where livelihoods are heavily ecosystem-dependent, there is a move
towards tribal self-rule. After more than a century-old centralised rule and marginalisation by
colonial and national governments, villagers are now taking control over land, water and forests,
and developmental and other processes affecting their lives. In Mendha (Lekha), the movement
towards self-rule started when villagers opposed unjust restrictions on forests and a process of
elimination of traditional rights. The first step towards achieving self-rule was taking control over
the forests and protecting, managing and using resources in a regulated manner. Community
forestry efforts in Orissa are often of a similar nature.
Starting a conservation initiative often means greater interaction with the people and processes
from outside the village. Making themselves familiar with these processes involves building local
capacities. Whenever communities have started village corpus funds, micro-credit schemes,
etc., they have had to learn systems of accounting and dealing with banks. Because of a more
equal interaction with the government departments and officials, villagers are better informed
about various government programmes and their impacts on their lives. Many empowered
village representatives involved with conservation have been able to participate in national
policy dialogues. Some have even travelled to international forums to share their experiences
and expresses their views. Establishing local institutions and participating in their day-to-day
running as also establishing and implementing rules and regulations enhances the administration
72 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

capacity of the villagers. It appears that vis-a vis outsiders, conserving communities have gained
greater political and negotiation power. However, within the community whether such political
empowerment has spread equally is difficult to say with this level of information. There are some
examples in this directory such as Makku in Uttarakhand and Dengajhari and other villages in
Orissa and elsewhere, where women seem to have gained greater decision-making power, but this
cannot be extrapolated to all examples.

4.3 How do CCAs benefit wildlife and biodiversity?

As explained in Section 1.2b very few of the areas documented here have been subjected to
scientific assessments to understand exactly how the CCA initiative has benefited habitats and
species. Some studies by wildlife scientists or NGOs show clear ecological benefits, e.g. plant
biodiversity conservation in Jardhargaon (Uttarakhand) or increase in nesting Pelican numbers in
Kokare Bellur. In the absence of such studies elsewhere, ecological impacts could only be judged
based on visual impressions and interactions with local people. For example, in Nagaland it is
in general easy to come across forested areas (over 80 per cent of the state has forest cover)
but very difficult to come across signs of birds or mammals. Exceptions to this rule were the
community protected areas where one frequently encountered signs of various species and saw
and heard many birds. In Khonoma, where hunting is completely banned, birds and signs of
other animals were very common. 600ha of regenerated village forests of Tokpa Kabui village
of Churachandpur district, in the adjacent state of Manipur provide a critical refuge for many
endangered birds, including blyth’s tragopan, grey sibia, beautiful sibia, grey peacock pheasant,
rufous-necked hornbill and white-naped yuhina. Villagers also report sighting other rare species,
including the spotted linsang, tiger, leopard, wild dog, stump-tailed macaque and Asiatic black
bear. Villagers in Shankarghola are protecting the endangered golden langur, and fresh reports
from Meghalaya show that other communities are also involved in protection of the hoolock gibbon
there (see Meghalaya chapter for details). Another (somewhat ironic) indication of increase in
wildlife in many CCAs is the increase in crop or livestock damage in areas surrounding the CCAs.
The table below gives some examples from the Directory where ecological benefits can be seen.
Table 2: Positive ecological impacts of CCAs in India40

No. Type of initiative Result Examples41

1 Traditional protection of Protection, often total, of Chusana Island in Gujarat,
religiously and culturally forests, grasslands, tanks and Aravanchal Kavu in Kerala,
important sites and new other ecosystems and habitats Khonoma Nature Reserve and
wildlife reserves resulting in absolute protection Sendenyu in Nagaland
to all species and their habitats
2 Traditional or religious Absolute protection to a certain Khichan in Rajasthan,
protection of sacred species, but often with less Uppalapadu in Andhra
species thought about their habitat or Pradesh, Abohar in Punjab,
the other species in the area Buguda in Orissa
3 Traditional and recent The area is used but wild Ajeevali in Maharashtra,
initiatives towards plant and animal species are Mangalajodi in Orissa,
sustainable use consciously protected. Protection Veerapuram in Andhra
practices for habitats, usually not restricted to any Pradesh, Bhaonta-Kolyala in
including sacred sites particular species Rajasthan, Behroonguda in
where some regulated Andhra Pradesh, Ashtamudi
use may be allowed lake in Kerala, Doddabail
but protection of wild in Karnataka, Balukhand-
animals is also one of Konark sanctuary and
the primary objectives. Kodbahal in Orissa,
Loktak lake in Manipur

4 Recent initiatives Revival or protection of Olive ridley protection in

towards protection of threatened populations of wild Iringal and surrounding
threatened species animals. Threatened species villages at Kolavipaalam in
such as golden langur, Blyth’s Kerala and Purunabandha
tragopan, Hoolock gibbon, Olive and other villages at
Ridley turtle, etc. So far no Rushikulya in Orissa,
examples of special protection of Blyth’s tragopan protection
large herbivores like elephants in Khonoma, Chizami and
or carnivores like tigers have other areas in Nagaland,
been encountered in such kind Shankarghola in Assam
of initiatives
 Overview 73

5 Recent initiatives Habitat conservation. Protection Mendha (Lekha) in

to conserve and/or efforts are generic, not directed Maharashtra, Suva in Andhra
regulated use relatively at any particular species or Pradesh, Dengajhari and
intact ecosystems habitat needs, and like all the Jhardeda in Orissa,
other categories in this table, Kailadevi and Kishori in
not necessarily informed by Rajasthan, Chittrangudi and,
present-day conservation Longwood Shola in Tamil
priorities. However, these Nadu,
do provide reduced threat Gursikaran forests in UP,
situations. Sometimes larger Makku Van Panchayat in
herbivores and carnivores also Uttarakhand
benefit from such initiatives
6 Recent initiatives Some of these are regeneration Shankarghola and
to revive degraded initiatives with the objective Chakrashila in Assam,
habitats and sustainably of reviving wild species as Jardhargaon,
use them and protecting much as overcoming resource Nahinkala and
wild species therein scarcities while others were Lohathal in Uttarakhand,
initiated mainly for resource Satara-Tukum, Belgata,
enhancement but have now Charoti and Saigata in
seen revival of many other wild Maharashtra,
flora and fauna species. These Thaing sacred grove in
do provide a better habitat and Meghalaya,
reduced threat to wildlife. Binjgiri Hills in Orissa
7 Examples where water Improved status of soil and Binjiri Hills and Budhikhamari
and soil quality has water, and reduction in in Orissa, Bhaonta-Kolyala
improved and impact of situations of droughts, floods, and Kishori in Rajasthan,
natural disasters such etc. Melaghar in Tripura, Dakhyat
as floods, landslides, and Lohathal in Uttarakhand
droughts, cyclones, etc.
has been reduced

In Gadchiroli district of Maharashtra, Udaipur district in Rajasthan, Uttarakhand and other areas,
conserving communities have managed to contain encroachment of forest areas for agricultural
purposes. In Jardhargaon, Saigata, and Bhaonta-Kolyala, wild animals have returned to the
conserved village forests after decades. Many endangered birds such as the spotted pelican and the
great Indian bustard as well as animals like the blackbuck survive today because of the protection
given to them by the local villagers. Almost all CCAs are conserving habitats which support wildlife
populations. In Orissa, the entire Ranpur range is under protection from different villages. The
overall result is that, compared to the completely bare hillsides in the surrounding area, this entire
range is well forested. In Dengajheri, in the same state the villagers spoke about elephants visiting
their forests. It was very clear that the quality of forests was much better than those outside the
range where there was no community conservation. It appears that as the corridors are getting
destroyed and migratory routes blocked, regenerated forests under CFM become good habitats for
elephants to move into. This is an observation that still needs to be ascertained and scientifically
established.
It is important to note that the quality of ecosystems and resources is not merely controlled by the
forces within the communities. Several factors beyond the control of the conserving communities
have a direct impact on the conserved area. For example, in Satara Tukum in Maharashtra the
forest development corporation (FDCM) (see case study for details) is carrying out clear-felling
in good patches of forests immediately adjoining the conserved area. This has led to human
population dependent on the cleared forests diverting their pressure to the forests protected by
Satara Tukum. Also this means that fauna species from elsewhere come to the protected patch for
shelter, increasing the human-wildlife conflicts. The demand of the villagers that the surrounding
forests be included under JFM has not yet been accepted.
An attempt has been made in Figure 17 to understand the impacts of CCAs documented in this
Directory. This analysis is based on very broad indicators involving personal observations, local
interviews, and views and observations of NGOs or government agencies about the particular
site.
74 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

Figure 17: Ecological impacts of CCAs

Figure 17 indicates that in 106 (88 per cent) cases documented here, there appears to have
been an enhancement or maintenance of an ecosystem, indicating a potential benefit to many wild
plants and animals. In 82 (63 per cent) of the cases, some specific species have benefited, and in
66 (55 per cent) cases there has been an improvement in the water or soil situation or a reduction
in landslides, droughts, etc. In 45 cases (38 per cent) there has been a positive impact on the
adjoining area, mainly by inspiring neighbours to initiate conservation activities and sometimes by
people meeting their own requirements from the regenerated resources. In 13 (11 per cent) of the
cases, respondents report that conservation efforts in the area have meant an increased pressure
on resources in the surrounding area.

Box 9
Why CCAs are important for conservation
• They protect habitats and species which are otherwise threatened (including some globally
threatened species).
• They have significant ecological, cultural and traditional knowledge-related values.
• The traditional or new management systems (institutions and organizations), while being
important in the social sense, are also important from the context of conservation.
• They help maintain essential ecosystem functions such as water security, controlling soil
erosion, working as cyclone barriers, protection of gene pools and so on.
• Conservation is often a part of normal livelihood or cultural activities, through existing systems
and structures, thus reducing external financial inputs.
• While usually not large in size, CCAs can be connected and could be a focus for natural
forest and landscape restoration as well as for landscape management, as in the case of
the van panchayats between Nanda Devi National Park and Askot Wildife Sanctuary in
Uttarakhand.42
• They help synergise links between agricultural biodiversity and wildlife, providing larger
landscape-level integration.
• The sheer number (and, by implication, the area) of CCAs found across the country is
of importance. They would mostly classify as protected areas, though few have formal
recognition.
• They help provide corridors and linkages for animal and gene movement.
• They are a key point of entry for linking rural livelihoods to conservation.
• They provide critical lessons for better management of government-established and managed
PAs, especially in integrating conservation and livelihoods and in resolving disputes.
• They may provide crucial elements and resources for mitigating and adapting to climate
change.
 Overview 75

5. Major threats and challenges faced by CCAs

CCAs all across the country are faced with numerous internal and external threats. Many of
these threats have their roots in the national and global context within which we all exist today.
The model of ‘development’ that our societies, economies and polities are governed by mandates
maximum use of resources in minimum time. This is a model where costs and benefits are
weighed only in financial terms, directly contradicting the spirit and principles of sustainability or
nature conservation, a model that believes in absolute preservation of nature in small islands and
maximum extraction for human use everywhere else. It is therefore not surprising that the efforts
of the communities based in regulated usage along with conservation are viewed with suspicion
and scepticism. This prevents them from getting social, administrative and legal recognition. Lack
of recognition in turn intensifies the existing internal and external threats or makes it difficult to
deal with them.
In the following analysis the threats faced by the communities have been divided into two broad
heads, those internal to the community and external, including those which manifest within the
communities but are a result of external factors:
Figure 18: CCAs threatened by internal and external factors

5.1. What are the internal threats faced by CCAs?

Although internal social inequities, conflicts, political rivalries, and so on exist in some form or
the other in most CCAs documented, about 47 per cent (56 out of 120 cases analysed) seem to
be in a situation where they could impact the success of the initiative. Below are given some such
factors that have an influence on a CCA and can threaten its existence:
a. Traditional social inequities: Communities are often highly stratified with many decisions
made by the dominant sections of society (men, large landowners, ‘upper’ castes) without
considering their impacts on the less privileged (women, landless, ‘lower’ castes). Such disparities
in decision-making can create local dissatisfaction and affect the long-term sustainability of the
initiative (also see Section 6.2 on social limitations).
b. Demographic changes: Human and livestock populations have increased manifold in several
areas. Due to this (and a number of other reasons) the habitats have degraded and the total
available resource base has shrunk. This leads to conflicts with others as also to over-exploitation
of resources that communities are sometimes not able to curb on their own.
c. Reduced availability of resources: In some places previously sustainable levels of resource
use may now be causing over-exploitation, as a number of extraneous circumstances may have
led to the decline in the extent or abundance of these resources. This is the situation, for instance,
with traditional hunting of wild animals where the populations of these species have declined due
to various factors emanating within and outside the community.
d. High cost of conservation: In most circumstances the costs mentioned in Section 4.1 are borne
by the community. Communities sometimes find it difficult to deal with issues such as investment
in time and labour, paying salaries for village forest guards, conflicts with other communities,
human-wildlife conflicts, dealing with powerful outside offenders, unable to earn livelihoods and
so on. If they do not receive support at these critical times then the initiative itself comes under
threat.
76 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

5.2 What are the external threats faced by CCAs?

a. Lack of legal backing and tenurial security: There is no comprehensive government policy
to support CCAs. Additionally, few of the initiatives mentioned above have a status vis-a-vis
statutory law, other than in Nagaland (also see Section 8 for legal status of CCAs). Many CCAs
are on lands owned by the government, over which the community does not have ownership or
recognised access rights. The government can decide to change the land-use or lease the land for
any other purpose without consulting or even informing the conserving communities. This can in
some situations seriously threaten a CCA. For example:
• Saigata village faced a strange situation in the late 1990s when they stopped outsiders from
entering their forests. They were not only questioned by the trespassers about their authority to
protect forests, but the FD officials asserted that the villagers had no legal authority to conserve
the forest. They argued with the FD that they were merely fulfilling their obligation as citizens of
this country by protecting the forests.
• Because of a lack of recognition, government agencies often do not support the communities
involved in conservation activities. Communities are left to fight their own battles. For example,
in some villages in Orissa when women started protecting the forests and apprehended the
offenders, the forest officials did not come to help. This discouraged and disheartened the
protecting groups, as the offenders also got a clear message that the villagers were not backed
by the government.
• On the other hand, when the forests have regenerated or protected rivers have fish in them
because of community efforts, the government agencies then sometimes contract these out for
harvest and revenue-generation, and the efforts of the community are not recognised.
b. Inappropriate or no government support: CCAs that contain commercially valuable resources
(e.g., timber, fauna, minerals) are often encroached upon or threatened by commercial users, land
grabbers, resource traffickers or individual community members.
A lack of support to deal with the above kinds of situations, negative intervention or influence
by government agencies or policies, and indifference towards CCAs have been found to be major
reasons for discouraging communities in many of the documented CCAs. Some such situations are
described below:
• In some CCAs, socially sensitive government officers have used various government schemes
and policies for initiating CCAs or supporting them at critical junctures. However, such initiatives
hinge delicately on the continued presence of this particular officer (or group of officers) for a
certain duration. When the officer is transferred out, the next one may not have the same social
sensitivity, and this can be very detrimental for the initiative.
• Even when well-intentioned, when government policies to support CCAs are implemented, they
are based on straitjacketed approaches, often taking over key community functions. They may
also establish uniform and parallel institutional bodies based on representative politics to replace
the existing institutions, without taking into account local peculiarities. More often than not this
angers and upsets the concerned communities as they prefer facilitation or improvement of the
existing institutions or working out new site-specific institutions in consultation with the local
people. There are numerous examples cited in this compilation—CFM initiatives in Orissa, CCAs
in Kailadevi in Rajasthan—where imposition of new institutions has led to the breakdown of
otherwise well-functioning initiatives (see Section 7.7 on external intervention; See also Section
8.1 (i) on the imitations of legal provisions relating to CCAs).
c. External development projects and processes
Many CCAs are faced with detrimental developmental and market pressures. Often the community
initiative itself is a response to such threats (see section 2.2 above), but many times these pressures
could undermine the efforts of the conserving communities.
• A 30-year mining lease was given in the early 2000s in forests protected by women near
Jardhargaon (Uttarakhand). In Halkar village (Karnataka), the government leased out the forests
protected by the villagers for commercial timber extraction.
• With industrialisation being put on the fast track in Orissa, many CCAs are under threat. In 2005,
the forest lands and other common lands were leased for open-cast coal mining at Raijharan in
Orissa. These forests are densely covered with sal forests. Four villages—Raijharan, Nandijhor,
Goalgadia and Similisahi—have been protecting and managing the forests for the last 15 years.
These include villages which are under the government-sponsored joint forest management
scheme.
 Overview 77

• The turtle conservation effort in Kolavipaalam in Kerala is threatened by commercial extraction

of sand by powerful people from outside the community. The turtle mass-nesting sites and
community efforts to protect these sites are threatened by port development and large-scale
commercial fishing activities in Orissa. In Morjim village in Goa, the effort at protection of the
turtle nesting site fizzled out as the youth involved in protection activities were eventually drawn
into the highly lucrative tourism business. Owning a beach shack and supporting construction of
hotels for the tourist was much more economically and socially sustainable than opposing large-
scale tourism in order to protect turtles. Lack of help in being able to draw positive links between
economic growth and turtle conservation led to a complete collapse of the initiative.43
d. Smuggling and poaching: Communities like Dengajheri in Orissa are constantly under threat
from the timber smugglers, while in Shankarghola in Assam the villagers have to be very vigilant
against animal poachers. The situation is particularly difficult in areas where forests support
valuable species of flora and fauna such as medicinal plants, mammals, teak and other trees.
e. Attitudes of others: Attitudes of conservationists and government agencies towards some
ecological issues can sometimes be a major stumbling block in resolving some issues related
to CCAs. For instance, the official attitude that shifting cultivation is necessarily harmful in all
situations may differ substantially from that of the local population, and its imposition would affect
local management practices and autonomy.
Often it is difficult to distinguish between the internal and the external threats, particularly when
situations have manifested within a community as a result of external influences. For example:
f. Breakdown of traditional institutions and knowledge: Traditional institutions and knowledge
systems have eroded to a great extent because of a number of reasons, including colonial or
centralised administration and politics. This has weakened communities’ abilities to manage their
own environment. This often makes them dependent on constant external facilitation and inputs.
g. The education system: The education system does not emphasise or even acknowledge the
value of local natural resources, culture and traditional knowledge. This results in a disconnect
between the semi-educated village youth and the village and its life. Little traditional knowledge
passes on to the newer generation and their interaction with the surrounding environment ends
up becoming indifferent or negative. The youth often find local values irrelevant in the face of
changing socio-economic scenarios and severe livelihood pressures.
h. Changing value systems and aspirations: Community values, motivations and organisations
are constantly faced with contradictory values and influences such as national and international
markets along with inherent inequities within them and powerful commercial forces. Intrusions by
dominant religions often have serious impacts on local value systems and traditional conservation
practices (especially among indigenous/tribal communities). Local institutions have to be very
strong to be able to face up to these challenges. Additionally, market forces have deeply penetrated
local economies, increasing local material aspirations and individualism, thus further weakening
traditional value systems.
i. National and sub-national party politics: Party politics often enters villages in India in
perverse ways, completely politicising local institutions and creating divisions and conflicts with
the villages. The local concerns and issues in such circumstances take lower importance over the
‘larger’ matters of the concerned political party. In many cases extraordinary powers get divested
to a handful of party supporters, who use hooliganism to create fear. This impacts conservation
processes adversely. If such people are engaged in breaking the rules of the community, the
community has little power to stop them. In some villages like Mendha (Lekha) and Hiware Bazar,
villagers have shown their strength by keeping such politics out of their villages.
j. Global market forces: Global economic policies and market forces make it difficult for
communities to establish and maintain local and decentralised economic systems and markets,
affecting their financial sustainability.

6. Main limitations of CCAs

CCAs have their own limitations which need to be understood and resolved.

6.1. What are the ecological limitations?

Human-wildlife conflicts: In Jardhargaon, villagers are very proud of their efforts. The wild
animals can now be seen in the village after many years. However, this has also meant increased
incidents of crop and fruit depredation (as mentioned in Section 4.1). Such situations exist in many
78 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

CCAs, where increasing populations of birds and mammals have been leading to crop damage
or livestock losses. Such conflicts become particularly serious in sites where the surrounding
habitat is completely degraded, making the area conserved by the communities the only refuge
for wildlife. In a few CCAs, villagers are beginning to wonder whether they should seek a reopening
of regulated hunting of some species such as wild boar in order to resolve this problem. So far, few
communities have been able to resolve this issue, particularly crop damage.
In the recent times some organisations have been trying to focus on this issues, particularly in
government protected areas. Experiences of these organisations could be of use to CCAs as well.
For example the Snow Leopard Conservancy in Hemis National Park in Ladakh44 has initiated a
programme aimed at helping local people in reducing damage to livestock caused by the snow
leopard and help them in getting adequate and timely compensation for the incurred damages.
Protection of large carnivores and non-utility elements of biological diversity: In all the
efforts documented so far, there were just a few examples where animals covering a large range
or big carnivores are being protected by the communities, (such as elephants in Ranpur in Orissa,
hoolock gibbons in Meghalaya or lions in some villages around Gir National Park in Gujarat). In
many areas where stretches of forests are being protected, the presence of big carnivores such as
tigers and leopards is reported, but there are very few examples where areas are being protected
specifically for these species.
Many conservationists believe that community conservation may not always address the issue of
overall biodiversity conservation, as species that are not in use or are undesirable to the community
may not be given attention. However, only detailed ecological studies can substantiate or invalidate
this argument.
Lack of monitoring and evaluation: There are very few community conservation efforts that
are regularly monitored to assess their social or ecological impacts. This is particularly important
because a large number of CCAs have regulated use as their main management strategy. It is
important that studies are carried out to understand the impacts of resource extraction on the
habitat and the species therein. This could help in communities establishing processes and levels
of extraction that would be economically viable and ecologically less damaging. Also important is
to help them establish internal monitoring systems.
Lack of baseline information: It is clear that there is a need to carry out detailed assessment
of how conservation initiatives have benefited the ecosystem and various species. In most of
the cases not even a basic inventory of the flora and fauna found in these areas is available. In
many CCAs, youth have expressed an interest in developing such inventories or being part of the
biodiversity studies. Such local human resources and expertise should be used for the benefit of
the area. Detailed oral histories, especially of elders, would also provide an invaluable source of
information.
Forest fires: Forest fires are a common annual phenomenon in many Indian forests. Local
communities often do not consider annual forest fires detrimental to the health of the forest
ecosystems, claiming that the forests have acclimatized to these fires. Some ecologists may not
agree but there are not enough studies to suggest the validity of either points of view, or to
indicate optimum levels of fire in different ecosystems.
Impacts on the surrounding area: It is often claimed that the local community may be conserving
a small patch, but this is at the expense of added or diverted pressure to some other surrounding
areas. Can this then be called sustainable management of resources? A situation like this could
increase the existing conflicts or create new conflicts among two neighbouring communities or
with the official agency in-charge of the area to which the use has now been diverted. Figure 17
on ecological impact shows that in 13 out of 120 documented sites, the conserving community
has exerted a negative pressure on the surrounding forests. Studies of areas where such impacts
have not been recorded and those where the initiative has actually led to the betterment of the
surrounding areas need to be carried out, to get a better idea of where the balance lines.

6.2. What are the social limitations?

Local inequities: As mentioned in Section 1.3(a), it is quite clear from the documented examples
that communities themselves are often highly stratified. Assuming that devolving power to the
‘community’ will necessarily lead to just and sustainable ecological and social processes can
be a serious mistake.45 In many community initiatives (such as Saigata) this issue has been
tackled carefully and efforts have been made to ensure equal participation from all sections of
the society. On the other hand, there are many examples where decisions regarding conservation
 Overview 79

and protection of resources are taken by those sections of the society that are powerful (men, big
landowners, ‘upper-caste’ communities) and do not depend heavily on the concerned resources
for livelihood.46
After communities take a decision to conserve an area, people have to either manage within the
limited available resources or travel greater distances to collect the required biomass. In most
cases, it is the women who have to bear the brunt of this situation, as collection of fodder and
fuelwood is essentially their responsibility. The situation is especially serious in women-headed
households where the women have to leave small children and other family responsibilities and
spend a major part of the day collecting biomass. The pressure becomes very high if the major
source of income for the family is sale of headloads (fuelwood for sale carried on the head as
bundles) collected from the surrounding areas.47 For example, in male-dominated societies like
Rajasthan, where protection efforts have been initiated mainly by men, women’s needs are often
not taken into account. Women are expected to meet biomass requirements without entering
the forests. If the decision about conservation is taken by dominant sections of the community
without consulting others who may be more dependent on the resources (artisans, headloaders,
pastoralists etc.), the less dominant communities suffer more due to the restrictions.
Such disparities can have serious implication on the success of the initiative itself. As has been
mentioned by people in Dhani Panch Mauza in Orissa, protection responsibility often means a
higher cost for the poor, as they have to forgo their daily income when fulfilling the protection
responsibilities or attending village meetings. On the other hand, the rich have the option of
employing others to go patrolling on their behalf. This raises concerns of both social justice and
sustainability of the conservation initiative. Such efforts may appear successful in the short run but
may not sustain themselves in the long run due to growing dissatisfaction among the suppressed
sections.
It is in situations like these that the role of an external agency often gains importance, as such
agencies can help resolve some of the inequities which community members may find too difficult
to resolve themselves. However, unless done with extreme care, this can also cause sudden
disruption of local power structures, which may cause strong resentments (also see Section 7.7 on
role of an outsider).
Limited capacity: Although there are examples where community members manage their own
finances, manage ecosystems and even carry out ecological monitoring and evaluation, this is not
always possible. In many instances, community members depend heavily on outsiders for many
administrative skills. On the other hand, government officials working in an area rarely understand
or are sympathetic towards such needs of the people. For decentralised conservation efforts to
succeed, capacity-building through intensive training and reorientation programmes for all actors
at all stages becomes imperative.
Capacity-building programmes need to orient forest officials to the social face of conservation
and officials of other departments to issues of conservation, sensitising them to the needs and
aspirations of the local communities, developing capacities to play the role of sensitive co-
managers and extension officers, and devising mechanisms for making information available to
the local communities. These programmes also need to sensitise local communities to the larger
picture of conservation needs and to overcome the traditional distrust of the government agencies.
They should sensitise NGOs to the need for a combination of livelihood security and biodiversity
conservation, opening up a debate on the model of development and conservation to be followed
in the country; and devise ways and means of working together in a cooperative environment.
Several NGOs are now involved in such efforts.
Slow progress: Community conservation is a social process and has to progress taking into
account various circumstances and issues. This limits the speed of these efforts. In order to make
CCAs a success, implementing agencies need to work at a pace that communities are comfortable
with and are able to deal with. In 1999 the chief minister of Orissa made an announcement
that all villages in Orissa should form JFM Committees to manage their surrounding resources
within a short period. This announcement clearly indicates a lack of understanding of the ground
realities. Many communities no longer have the capacity to handle these responsibilities. Such
devolutionary efforts often only mean transfer of power from faraway political strongholds to local
political strongholds. Such short-sighted announcements only lead to officials establishing forest
protection committees on paper, without much change on the ground.
Community conservation is more likely to succeed when the entire community is empowered;
has a capacity to take informed decisions; and has the legal, economic, political, and social support
structure in place. Creating conducive environment for local empowerment will often need serious
social reforms and all-round capacity-building, which requires patience and perseverance from all
relevant actors.
80 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

7. Key issues and lessons48

7.1. Security of tenure
In nearly all the cases mentioned in this directory, it has been found that a sense of belonging or
custodianship towards the area, resources or species being conserved is one of the most important
factors in the decision of a community to start and carry on conservation efforts. Security of
tenure of the land being conserved, or the confidence that they could continue with their initiative
irrespective of the legal ownership of the land, is key to a successful community initiative. This
sense of belonging or security develops over a period of time through constant consumptive,
economic, cultural and religious associations and interaction with these resources. Therefore
continued access to the resource and security of tenure are key to a sense of responsibility towards
the resource among local communities. Analysis of some CCA initiatives which did not succeed
also indicates that lack of tenure was often a major reason for the failure. This is not to imply that
security of tenure will necessarily lead towards conservation, but rather that such security would
increase chances of initiating CCAs where they do not exist and strengthening the ones that do.
On the other hand the conservation effort itself strengthens a sense of security by increasing the
confidence among the communities about exercising their authority over the conserved land and
resources. In this directory there are many examples where people have gained de facto control
even when they do not have legal rights. Conservation efforts have thus given the villagers a
confidence about demanding legal security of tenure over the area that they have a strong sense
of belonging to, whether or not they own it.

7.2. Site-specific and decentralised management

It is becoming increasingly clear that uniform and straitjacketed models of development and
conservation are not sustainable. As is clear from the preceding discussion, community initiatives
are decentralised, site-specific and varied in their objectives and approaches. This is in contrast
to most government efforts, which have largely been centralised, top-down and working under
uniform legal and management prescriptions, not taking site peculiarities into account, though
many officials have tried breaking through the mould to design locally adapted initiatives (see
Section 5.2 on inappropriate or inadequate government support). However, making laws and
policies flexible as well as firm and strong against misuse of the flexibility is a tricky question, and
will involve serious debates and explorations.
One way of building in greater flexibility into the PA system would be to expand the number of
categories of protected or conservation areas, to include a range of different ecological and socio-
economic situations and governance types. The site-specific planning strategy (for zoning of PAs
and others) for these areas (specially the ones where human settlements exist) could be then done
based on participatory research with the local communities.
Such a paradigm shift is increasingly being accepted in international forums such as IUCN-
International Union for the Conservation of Nature, and the Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD). One key aspect of this is the addition of the governance dimension, reorganising that all
kinds of PAs can be managed by different kinds of actors, not only by governments. The PA type as
per the governance categorisation and governance-type matrix could thus look like table 3 below
(examples are not added here as they have already been given in table 2).
Table 3: Different governance types for IUCN categories of PAs.49

Governance type (across) Government- Co-managed PAs Private PAs CCAs

PA category (down) managed PAs (jointly managed (conservation (Examples as
by communities, on privately shown in table 2)
government and/or other owned lands and
concerned agencies) resources)
I Strict Nature Reserve
and Wilderness Area
II National Park
(ecosystem protection;
protection of cultural
values)
III Natural Monument
IV Habitat/Species
Management
V Protected Landscape/
Seascape
VI Managed Resource
 Overview 81

A protected area management and governance model as given in this matrix would be able to
provide support and recognition to a vast array of conservation arrangements, including CCAs.
In India we still do not have any clear criteria to decide what category a PA should be assigned:
a national park, a sanctuary, a community reserve, a conservation reserve or a tiger reserve (and
if one goes beyond the WLPA, then any of several other conservation categories; See Section
8). This causes ambiguity about the management objectives and practices to be followed for
these PAs. It is therefore imperative that PAs are established and categorised after some level of
ecological and socio-economic research, and with specific objectives. Understanding and assessing
various community institutional arrangements, customary or new conservation rules, and systems
of natural resource management followed by different conserving communities can give important
leads in formulating such a flexible and locale-specific policy framework.
In terms of site-specific policy space, lessons can be learnt from Nepal, where under a common
national law some areas are declared conservation areas. Each conservation area has a separate
set of specific rules and regulations for its management.50 While identifying the objectives, the
ecological importance of inviolate zones (with no or minimal human use) will of course have to
be considered. However, the process of identification of such zones could itself be participatory
as also the conservation practices that will need to be followed in these zones. The importance
of completely inviolate areas has been recognised for generations in community systems of
management, as shown in examples in table 1.

7.3. Coordinated action and support

Conservation of resources by communities is a part of livelihood insurance and is linked with
other social dynamics. Conservation initiatives can lead to other social reforms in the village,
e.g., equity, empowerment, etc. On the other hand other social processes such as efforts towards
generating empowerment may lead to initiation of conservation. Conservation, therefore, cannot
be seen in isolation from other social, economic and political processes within the community.
However the government and NGOs working in an area do not necessarily operate with this view.
Local development and conservation activities are highly compartmentalised, with each line agency
focusing on its own area of work, sometimes conflicting with or contradicting that of the other line
agencies. Often, while the conservation agency is trying to discourage goat-rearing in an area, the
animal husbandry department tries to promote goats. This is also true of NGOs working in local
areas.
Most government and civil society agencies have now realised that formation of people’s saving
groups at village level is a useful way of mobilising communities, and achieving conservation or
rural development objectives. However, there are many examples where not less than six agencies
(including NGOs) operate different saving groups in the same village, thus not only spreading the
resources thin but also dividing the community to achieve their own agenda. There needs to be
much greater coordination amongst such agencies.
A fine example of holistic development is that of Mendha (Lekha) village in Maharashtra. Here
conservation efforts have also meant, among other things, achieving local self-rule, managing
their water resources, establishment of a grain bank for the villagers, working towards ecologically
and socially sensitive education for village youth, and ensuring employment for everyone in the
village. In order to reduce excessive dependence on forests for firewood, villagers have managed
to create alternative sources of fuel in the village by encouraging various line agencies to pool their
resources.
In many wildlife and forest areas, authorities can overcome the problem of inadequate resources,
especially for the provision of ecologically sensitive livelihood inputs to local communities, by
pooling together resources of different line agencies. Financial constraints are often cited as
important reasons for not supporting a community effort on the ground or for discontinuing a JFM
programme once the external funds have run out. For example, in Amravati District of Maharashtra,
an enterprising official put all the line agency budgets together, and managed to generate adequate
resources for ecologically sensitive development inputs for villagers in/around the Melghat Tiger
Reserve.51 But this was an individual effort, and without a formal institutionalised mechanism, such
initiatives have remained personalised and short-lived. In recent times an initiative for ecological
development and conservation of Chilika Lagoon has been tried with involvement of all local and
political agencies.52 Community empowerment coupled with strong policy directives can help
resolve this problem.
82 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

7.4. A landscape approach

The previous point leads us to the fact that areas conserved for biodiversity do not exist in
isolation and are impacted by various social and political forces and land-use practices in the
surrounding areas. Allowing resource-intensive activities in the surrounding areas could put more
pressure on the biodiversity of the area to be protected (as is clear from the activities of the FDCM
at Satara Tukum in Maharashtra), or act in contradiction to conservation objectives.
It is extremely important to orient regional planning towards the ecological and cultural dimensions
of an area, including community conservation efforts. A community’s wish to conserve a certain
area needs to be respected and reflected in the regional planning. Some community efforts have
very strongly indicated the need for a landscape approach towards conservation. For example, the
villages located in the basin of the Arvari river in Alwar district, Rajasthan, have been conserving
the catchment forests for over two decades, resulting in the seasonal Arvari river becoming
perennial again. These villagers have formed an ‘Arvari Sansad‘ (Arvari Parliament), which aims
to be the primary decision-making body for the entire basin. This is based on the principle that a
holistic landscape approach will need to be taken for the conservation and use of the catchment.
Members of the Sansad believe that decisions made by individual villages are often restricted to
the interests of their own villages and may not adequately take care of the eco-region as a whole.
Similarly, in Orissa and Uttarakhand, CCAs are found in clusters and groups, sometimes taking
mountain ranges as units.

7.5. Governance and decision-making

Good governance is increasingly being seen as an important factor in ensuring the success of
any conservation effort. An IUCN policy brief states that ‘governance is about power, relationships
and accountability. It thus has major influence on the achievement of management objectives, the
sharing of relevant responsibilities, rights, costs and benefits, and the generation and sustenance
of community, political and financial support for wise and sustainable use.’53 International debate
has brought up the factors mentioned in the box below as crucial for ensuring ‘good’ governance.

Box 10
Principles of good governance of protected areas
Governance involves interactions among structures, processes, traditions and knowledge
systems that determine how power and responsibility are exercised, how decisions are taken,
and how citizens and other stakeholders have their say. It is a concept that applies at all levels
in the field of protected areas—site-level, national, regional and global.
Principles of good governance of PAs in general include legitimacy and voice, accountability,
performance, fairness, and direction. These principles need to be applied keeping in mind the
following:
a. Recognition of diverse knowledge systems;
b. Openness, transparency, and accountability in decision making;
c. Inclusive leadership;
d. Mobilizing support from diverse interests, from within the community; and
e. Sharing authority and resources and devolving/decentralizing decision- making authority
and resources where appropriate

Source: G. Borrini-Feyerabend, A. Kothari and G. Oviedo, Indigenous and Local Communities and Protected Areas:
Towards Equity and Enhanced Conservation. (Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, IUCN, 2004).

The CCAs documented in this directory throw up the following two important sets of factors for
good governance and long-term success:
Transparency, openness, and accountability: A transparent and democratic process of decision-
making leads towards a more successful effort and long-term sustainability than situations where
decisions are taken by a small minority through non-transparent means. The emphasis on equal
representation of all sections of society in information sharing and subsequent decision-making
is one of the unique features of many successful initiatives. For example in Mendha (Lekha), all
decisions are taken by consensus, after frequent discussions are carried out on all aspects of the
issue. Consensus-based decision-making is used in many CCAs. Besides, utilisation of community
funds or funds coming from various external programmes is often a serious source of discontent
within a community. Most successful community initiatives therefore have an open system of
 Overview 83

accounting, and accounts are regularly disclosed to the village assembly (and not only to a few
representatives) and expenditure explained. Where this does not happen, the efforts face hurdles
and may break down.
Constant dialogue and informed decisions: Lack of information and awareness is often cited
as a serious limitation by many communities, who seek help from outsiders in increasing their
experience and awareness levels. Being equipped with adequate and impartial information is a
critical factor in the success of CCAs. In many cases this has been made possible by constant
interaction with outsiders and regular discussions within the village (for example the study circles
in Mendha (Lekha) village in Maharashtra). Such interactions and information make people more
conscious and aware, which in turn helps them in taking informed decisions.
In India there are rarely any consultations with the local villagers on any new schemes or
changes of policies. For communities to have a stronger sense of belonging with their resources
and the rules governing them, it is important that regular dialogues are established with them.
Open and transparent public hearings or referendums on any intended new provisions or changes
in policies need to be carried out before a final decision is taken. Regularity of dialogue is important
in building the capacity of communities to be able to make an informed decision.
In recent times, some conservation organisations have attempted to resolve issues related to
conservation of big carnivores because of such dialogues and consultations. Organisations like
Samrakshan in Meghalaya, Nature Conservation Foundation (NCF) in Ladakh and Arunachal
Pradesh, Snow Leopard Conservancy in Ladakh, World Wide Fund for India (WWF) in Arunachal
Pradesh, Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Nature (SACON) in Nagaland, Vasundhara and
Foundation for Ecological Security in Orissa and numerous others have initiated such consultative
processes with the local communities to conserve wildlife and have been getting encouraging and
positive results.

7.6. Institution building and local institutions

In implementing decentralised conservation policies, it is important that while entrusting the
village community with the responsibility of resource management and protection, time and
effort is also spent in building institutions and capacities of those institutions to handle such
responsibilities.
Despite the success of Satara Tukum in achieving forest conservation, a meeting with the gram
sabha revealed that there was serious discontent among the villagers about the functioning of the
forest protection committee (FPC). Many villagers did not attend the meeting of the committee
and were not sure whether the funds were being utilised appropriately. In some CCAs such as
Saigata in Maharasthra, the initiative seems to be sustained entirely on the efforts of one or a
few individuals. Although they are well respected and command the support of the entire village,
there is no institution to take charge in their absence. On the other hand, in many examples in
Uttarakhand, Nagaland, Rajasthan and Orissa, much attention has been paid towards developing
local institutions that will sustain the initiative. This illustrates the importance that must be placed
on the process of developing and strengthening local institutions if the objectives are to be achieved
efficiently and in a sustained manner.
In Khonoma in Nagaland, a Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary Trust (KNCTS)
has been established under the village council to manage the sanctuary. The village council has
worked out detailed terms of reference and rules and regulations regarding the management of
the sanctuary. In Dengajheri in Orissa, the functioning of the women looking after issues of forest
protection appeared to be extremely informal. However, so far Dengajheri does not face issues of
fund transfers and resource allocation. Once these issues become important, a need for a more
organised yet transparent system is likely to be felt.

7.7. The role of the outsider

i) Do CCAs need external support?
In many CCAs (though definitely not all) villagers have indicated and often demanded that
management or conservation should be a joint activity of the communities and the government
officials or NGOs. Communities often realise the difficulty of managing natural resources on their
own, especially given the internal and external social dynamics and political and commercial
pressures. As Devaji Tofa of Mendha (Lekha) village in Maharasthra says, ‘However autonomous
a decision-making process in a village may be, a village in these times cannot be completely
independent of the world outside.’
84 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

Carrying on with the effort by themselves has not been an easy task for the villagers (see
Section 4.1 on costs to communities). A great amount of effort and time is spent by the villagers in
protection and patrolling of the forests. This is at the cost of wages that they would have earned,
opportunities for which are otherwise few and far between. Because of their remote location and
lack of awareness and knowledge, villagers are not in a position to find out about any beneficiary
schemes that may be available from the government. Remoteness of the area means that there
are few other employment opportunities. There is no existing system by which such information
can easily reach the villagers. Villagers, therefore, often express a need for outside agencies to
help them in exploring employment opportunities, and also guide them towards a sustainable
conservation effort.
In Rushikulya in Orissa, or Tuefema, Khonoma, Ghosu and other areas in Nagaland, communities
have requested NGOs and government agencies for developing a support mechanism which will
help them in a sustained manner. This could include help in creating an eco-tourism model or
other sources of income for the local youth, helping with inventorising local biodiversity and
related knowledge, helping to create effective benefit-sharing models such that villagers benefit
from the use of their knowledge, etc. In Nagaland, where the land is under the control of the
local communities and forests are still abundant, the local people request support in developing
management plans for sustainable harvest of resources for income generation from areas which
are not wildlife reserves.

ii) What kind of intervention do CCAs not need?

The national and state policy environments within which CCAs are located have a great influence
on their success and failure. For example, despite a widespread community forestry movement in
Orissa there is still no state-level policy to facilitate or support these initiatives. The closest that
the state government comes to supporting them is by implementing JFM scheme in these areas,
which, as explained below, are not always successful, and often even counter-productive.
In Buldhana district in Maharashtra, successful JFM was initiated in some villages by a forest
officer. Subsequently some parts of these jointly managed forests came under the newly
established Gyanganga Wildlife Sanctuary, bringing with it the restrictive provisions of the Wild
Life (Protection) Act (WLPA), applicable for a PA. Local people’s efforts at conservation and the
existing local institutions were discounted and became officially defunct. This created a serious
conflict situation. This initiative had the potential of becoming the country’s first jointly managed
PA, if only wildlife authorities had taken advantage of the existing cordial relationship between the
people and forest officials. However, the straitjacketed use of the WLPA brought the initiative to
the verge of breakdown.
Similarly, in Kailadevi Sanctuary of Rajasthan, local people had forest protection committees
much before the area was declared a PA. Many years after the declaration of the sanctuary, the
FD began implementing the official ecodevelopment scheme.54 The existing FPCs were co-opted to
be the ecodevelopment committees (EDCs). After half a decade of ecodevelopment the scenario
has completely changed. Whereas in the past these FPCs had numerous meetings on village
and forest conservation issues, now many months pass before a single meeting takes place,
mainly because of unavailability of the forest official, whose presence is mandatory for an EDC
meeting. Ecodevelopment also came with funded projects and plans—community participation in
conservation is therefore now more to avail the financial and other opportunities rather than a
community feeling and/or concern for degrading natural resources as was the case earlier.55
There are numerous examples of community forest management in Orissa where JFM was
implemented in areas where communities were already managing their resources. In some cases
(subject to the interest level and social sensitivity of the implementing officer) JFM provided the
support the communities needed. However, in most cases it resulted in breaking down existing
systems. JFM did not recognise the existing local institutions, systems of management or existing
local rules and regulations. Under JFM new institutions and management systems had to be
framed which often had little acceptance by the local people. As opposed to the entire village
making decisions, under JFM decisions were made by a few selected individuals along with the
forest staff concerned. This left ample scope for non-transparent financial dealings and corruption,
consequently encouraging distrust and politicisation of the entire initiative.56
Similarly, the van panchayats in Uttarakhand have been affected by imposition of the JFM scheme
in the state. Kharg Karki, a village in Uttarakhand Champawat district has a VP formed in 1954.
The VP was largely functioning well till JFM was introduced in 1998. Within 6 months of this the
VP Sarpanch resigned due to friction with FD staff over handling of budgets. Since then the village
has not been able to recover from the disruption. In another case, there was an old VP, formed
 Overview 85

in 1945-47 covering 4 villages, which was functioning pretty well. Once JFM started in 1999, the
forests were divided into 4 VPs, one for each village. As the forest area and its composition for the
4 villages is not uniform, some of the villages are left with forest patches with chir pine which is
much less useful than broad-leaved species like oak. This has upset the villagers to the extent that
most women do not participate in the forest management activities anymore.57
Figure 19: Results of government intervention in CCAs

The analysis in Figure 19 shows that in 23 per cent of cases where an intervention was made
it proved useful for the CCAs, while in 22 per cent of cases it was detrimental. Whether the
intervention is detrimental or not depends on the concerned government agencies and officers and
the strength of the local institution.

iii. What kind of intervention and support structures do CCAs need?

An active role of the state as a partner in the management of resources is often envisaged by local
communities, but on equal terms and in the capacity of a facilitator and guide rather than a ruler or
policeperson. Such official intervention has to be very carefully thought out and implemented.
Based on the experience of the documented case studies and the analysis under various sections
of this overview it appears that the external agencies can play an important role in the following
ways:
1. Making information available to the conserving communities on a regular basis to help them
take informed decisions.
2. Helping them resolve conflicts when such conflicts cannot be resolved internally or when conflicts
are with powerful outsiders.
3. Helping in reducing traditional social inequities, attempting to ensure greater transparencies in
local institutions, greater participation from all sections of the community, and so on.
4. Providing financial, technical, ecological, legal and any other help that may be required on a
regular basis.
5. Help in establishing regular contact with outside agencies, particularly with the government
agencies, to be able to resolve misunderstandings and conflicts.
6. Helping in gaining recognition, appreciation, pride and thus encouragement and support by
bringing their efforts to the larger society.
7. Presently even remotely located communities are linked to markets and dependent on them to a
varying degree for cash income. However, the markets with which these communities interface
are often highly exploitative, and government policies often end up supporting the exploitation.
Most communities need help with such interface, whether it is to do with marketing of non-
timber forest produce, produce from other ecosystems, developing eco-tourism packages or
any.
8. Outside agencies can help communities bring in ecological concerns more centrally into their
efforts, inventorise ecological elements and local knowledge, conduct impact studies, devise
systems for effective management of resources and wildlife therein, and so on.
For any agency interested in a positive intervention in a CCA, it is important to understand
that any negotiations at the start of the intervention need to be done at the level of the village
86 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

or hamlet assembly/community council (involving all adult members, irrespective of caste, class,
gender, etc.) or community groups, and not any representative/executive body selected by
the intervening agency (although such bodies could be approached to help organise the larger
meeting). Any decision-making bodies that are established need to be transparent and acceptable
to all in the community. Along with a decision-making body it is important to have an open forum
for discussion that will lead towards well-informed decisions by the community. External agencies
could play a critical role at these discussion forums and bring in the larger perspectives often not
so easily perceived by the villagers. In turn, outsiders could learn from the detailed site-specific
information that the local people have.
It is also important to note that CCAs need decentralised decision-making systems but also a
decentralised support and facilitation system, along with a central (state and national) framework
(including legal and policy regimes) that facilitates such a system. Such support structures have
organically emerged in many states or sub-state levels, like the CFM federation in Ranpur block of
Orissa, Chakhesang People’s Organisation in Phek District of Nagaland, CFM Federations in Udaipur
District of Rajasthan facilitated by an NGO called Seva Mandir, and so on. In areas where such
structures do not yet exist, but where there is a potential, the government or NGOs could provide
need-based support.
In areas where there is currently no possibility of such systems developing organically, intervening
agencies may need to create such forums with complete participation of the local people and taking
into account understanding local dynamics and politics. The existing government institutions and
spaces such as the State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) can be explored for this. Such a forum,
if created, should be well represented by government line agencies, non-government agencies,
individuals associated with the initiative, and members of the concerned community. It is important
that this forum:
a. Gains an understanding of the local systems in operation in the community conservation sites
in the area.
b. Carries out an independent assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, needs, and limitations of
these initiatives.
c. Creates a mechanism for regular interaction and information/experience sharing.
d. Encourages and supports the community to overcome its limitations, constraints and weaknesses,
appropriately taking into account local sensitivities.
e. Organises capacity building programmes whenever necessary.
f. Helps communities monitor the impacts of their activities.
g. Helps communities create an appropriate and non-exploitative market link.
While doing all of this the forum should be careful about not creating a dependence on itself.

7.8. Role of local leadership

Considering that a large amount of the local community’s time must go into earning a livelihood,
it is sometimes difficult to sustain the fervour for protection activities, especially if there are no
immediate threats. In circumstances such as these, an individual or a group of individuals from
within the community plays an extremely important role in motivating the community, carrying out
important tasks and guiding the entire initiative. Often the initiative itself is a result of mobilisation
by such social leaders. In Mendha (Lekha) (Maharashtra), Devaji Tofa, along with a group of
elders from the village, has played that role; in Saigata (Maharashtra) a dalit youth, Surbhan
Khobragade, who initiated the effort about 35 years ago, continues to play that role. In Jardhargaon
(Uttarakhand), Vijay Jardhari has motivated and inspired his villagers towards forest protection as
well as protecting the diversity of seeds. In Satara Tukum (Maharashtra), although the initiative
was started by the forest department, the village youth soon took on the responsibility of forest
protection. The leadership and motivation here is provided by these youth. Similarly, in CCAs
across India local social leaders are playing an important role.
Sometimes there appears to be a heavy dependence on these leaders, with no one to take over
in their absence. In some areas efforts are being made towards including the youth in the village
processes. In developing a decentralised conservation policy it is important that efforts are invested
in developing or creating circumstances for such leadership within the community to continue and
elements of the same to be passed on to the next rung of leadership. Often such leaders have to
pay an enormous personal price to play the required role, a phenomenon that can at times be a
 Overview 87

hurdle towards a smooth transition to the second line of leadership. It is important to bear in mind
that such leaders, working largely for the social cause, cannot be replaced by leadership emerging
out of financial, political, and other selfish motives.

7.9. Integration of conservation and livelihoods

In nearly all CCAs, a strong link between conservation and local livelihoods emerges. Local
communities necessarily bring in elements of their livelihoods into the equation. In a few cases
they may decide to completely forego any direct livelihood benefits (e.g., Khonoma). In most
cases, however (and given other favourable factors), they will tend to integrate conservation
and livelihoods, deriving substantial and subsistence ecological benefits (e.g., Dengajheri), or
considerable direct extractive benefits (e.g. Satara Tukum, Saigata, Mendha (Lekha), and others).
This is an important lesson to keep in mind while formulating participatory conservation plans for
government-managed PAs.
Community initiatives have often also integrated the conservation of both ‘wild’ and ‘domesticated’
biodiversity. Indeed, their stress on both indicates that the conventional divide between them is
somewhat artificial, and that communities tend to look at them as part of a continuum from
predominantly wild to semi-wild, and semi-domesticated to predominantly domesticated. Several
traditional practices of optimising this range of biodiversity (such as home gardens in south and
north-east India) are part of management systems in CCAs. In villages like Jardhargaon and
Nahinkala in Uttarakhand, farmers who are involved in forest conservation are also reviving a range
of agro-biodiverse practices, including trying out several hundred varieties/races of rice, beans and
other crops. (This also reinforces the arguments presented in section 7.4 on why conservation
needs to happen within a landscape rather than only in small, highly protected islands.)
Formal conservation planners and habitat managers would do well to build in such concerns to
enable a marriage of livelihood requirements and biodiversity conservation. This is not to say that
such marriages will be possible or easy to achieve in all circumstances but only to suggest that
sincere efforts should be made.
Having said this, it is important to mention that a continuous monitoring and evaluation of
the use of a resource and its impact on the conserved area needs to be an integral part of any
conservation effort, particularly when meeting livelihood needs is one of the objectives too. This in
itself may be most effective if it is participatory and transparent.
The jungle abhyas mandal (forest study group) in Mendha (Lekha) in Maharashtra, consisting
of villagers and outside experts, was involved in assessing the impact of NTFP harvesting on the
regeneration capacity of the concerned plants. Results of this study helped the villagers take
various regulatory measures for extraction of major NTFPs in the village.58
An initiative of the Vivekananda Girijan Kalyan Kendra (VGKK) and Ashoka Trust for Research
in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), Bangalore, in Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple Sanctuary in
Karnataka has helped the local tribals earn higher revenue by value-addition to the NTFP harvested
by them. ATREE has also devised a mechanism for monitoring of resource extraction with the help
of the local tribals.59
If used effectively, conservation can often become a model for biodiversity-based livelihood
options. By developing models of fair trade and encouraging value addition at source, livelihood
options can be increased manifold, thus further strengthening conservation efforts. One could
hypothesise that if conservation becomes a strong tool for social upliftment, more and more
communities would want to become part of the wildlife protection movement, rather than being
hostile or indifferent to it as is the case in many PAs today.

7.10 Funding
Many successful community initiatives try to avoid receiving huge external funding. Some
communities have tried to build up a corpus fund by contributions from within the community and/
or through executing fines and punishments. Others have managed to get funds from the local line-
agencies. Examples suggest that rather than providing large amounts of external monetary inputs
specifically for conservation, it is often more useful to mobilise and re-orient already available
resources by helping to pool together the budgets of various line departments. Being relatively
independent in financial terms is empowering for a community. On the other hand there are
numerous examples of donor-driven community conservation programmes which collapse as soon
as the donor pulls out unless financial sustainability has been built in from the start.60 There are
88 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

also examples where the funds coming under a certain programme become the most important
incentive for the community to participate in conservation activities, but this may not necessarily
be effective.
This is not to say that communities never need external funding, but to emphasis the importance
of the manner in which and time when financial contribution is made to a community. CCAs should
be able to receive funds when critically required, and in ways that the communities can themselves
manage. Communities could be encouraged to develop annual plans, budgets and assessments
reflecting the nature of conservation and development needs and funds required.
The need for financial sustainability is the basis for a series of innovative mechanisms now being
evolved by governments, NGOs, and donors, such as trust funds and foundations.

8. Legal and policy spaces for CCAs

It is important to understand relevant provisions in Indian laws that support (or hinder) CCAs
(also see Annexure 3).

8.1 What spaces are available for CCAs in Indian law?

There is no national-level policy to recognize conservation efforts by communities, though there
are references to such a need in documents such as the National Wildlife Action Plan, the draft
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan and some others (see below for details). Neither is
there a law specifically focused on providing support to CCAs. However, there are limited spaces
available in some laws—limited because they do not take into account the ground reality of CCAs,
their local contexts and local institutions. As far as we know, very few CCAs have yet taken support
from any of the laws and policies mentioned below (except in the case of Nagaland, where the
state-specific law on village councils has been used).
(i) Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act 2003 (also see Annexures 4, 5 and 6)
envfor.nic.in/legis/wildlife/wild_act_02.pdf
Till the year 2002, the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972 had little to encourage or mandate people’s
participation in conservation, or to recognise areas conserved by communities. Two new categories
of protected areas were introduced into the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act 2003, namely
community reserves and conservation reserves. Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS), Wildlife
Trust of India (WTI) and Kalpavriksh had organised a workshop in 2004 to understand how the
new categories could support CCAs or help communities initiate conservation efforts. Deliberations
during the workshop revealed that these two provisions provide very limited support to CCAs (for
detailed analysis see Annexure 3). The analysis indicated the following:
Conservation Reserves: These are meant to elicit people’s opinions in declaring government-owned
lands protected for wildlife conservation. This category does open up some space in the law for
people’s participation in wildlife conservation. Consultations with local people before declaring an
area a conservation reserve is mandatory, as opposed to the situation in other protected areas
such as national parks and sanctuaries. Considering that local people generally do not become
aware of the changed legal status of an area even after years of it being declared a national park
or a sanctuary, any consultation (even if not opinion-seeking) is a step towards some form of
democratic decision-making. However, most CCAs that we have interacted with are unlikely to
be happy with this category. These CCAs are on government lands but they have their own well
worked-out management and regulation institutions, and a high degree of de facto control. It is
unlikely that these well-established institutions would agree to become part of a conservation
reserve where their only role in decision-making would be to advise the chief wildlife warden
(CWW) of the state, who may or may not agree to the suggestions. Additionally, the conservation
reserve management committee to be established under the Act mandates representatives from
panchayats in an area rather than people actually conserving and managing the area. This could
be a good category to initiate conservation in areas where it may not be happening already.
Community Reserves: These can only be declared by the government on private or community
lands by the government. Therefore they can be relevant to only a few states like Nagaland, or
private forest areas in the Western Ghats, or wildlife that may exist on agricultural lands such as
blackbuck. It may be possible to argue that the term ‘community lands’ should include government
lands (particularly those which are being used as common lands), and at the time of going to
press, it appears that Kerala may be doing this. In general, though, it is unlikely that such a
broad interpretation will be given by most states. Moreover, in its current form the Act does not
 Overview 89

recognize existing systems and institutions of management and has a uniform prescription for the
composition of the local institutions. This would straitjacket a very diverse institutional reality.
Finally, there are no guidelines on how these areas are to be declared.61 For all these reasons,
community reserves is an inappropriate category for most CCAs.

ii. Wild Life Protection Amendment Act 2006

http://164.100.24.208/ls/Bills52,2006.pdf
Another amendment in the Wild Life (Protection) Act in 2006 has resulted in the setting up of
a National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA). This was a result of the dwindling population of
tigers in India. As one of the reasons for the decline is tiger population has been identified as lack of
people’s participation in PA and wildlife management, the Authority has been mandated to explore
ways of facilitating people’s participation in wildlife management. This may help in bringing about
a change in the general exclusionary model of conservation, thus paving way for the recognition of
CCAs in buffer zones of tiger reserves, though considerable advocacy will be needed to make this
happen. The actual impacts of this amendment are yet to be seen.

iii. The Biological Diversity Act 200362

envfor.nic.in/divisions/csurv/nba_act.htm
www.nbaindia.org/notification.htm
The strengths of this Act are that it encompasses all elements of biological diversity, domestic and
wild, and provides for protection of all kinds of ecosystems. One of the provisions of the Biological
Diversity Act 2002 includes creation of Biodiversity Management Committees (BMC) at the village
level. The National Biodiversity Authority and the State Biodiversity Boards established under the
Act are required to consult the local BMCs while taking decisions related to the use of biological
resources and knowledge associated with such resources. This provides a space for the local
communities to participate in the governance and decision-making related to biological diversity
to a certain extent. The BMCs are expected to be the local institutions for the management,
protection and recording of local biological diversity and it may be possible to give existing or new
CCA management institutions this status. The Act also provides for the declaration of areas being
conserved for agricultural or wildlife biodiversity as Biodiversity Heritage Sites (BHS).
The National Biological Diversity Rules under the BDA were formulated in 2004. The Rules failed
to empower the BMCs and thus the local communities to manage, use and conserve natural
ecosystems. Under the rules, the BMCs are limited to recording the local knowledge and to help
the state and national boards to grant permission for the use of biological resources and knowledge
associated with it in their areas. They also have a uniform institutional structure, which would be
inappropriate for most CCAs. Therefore, as per these rules, the space to provide legal backing to
CCAs is very limited. The rules for BHS have not yet been formulated so the category has not yet
been implemented anywhere in the country.63
If these aspects are dealt with in the rules (as some states like Madhya Pradesh and Sikkim have
done, going beyond the national rules), then BMCs and BHSs could become useful for providing
legal backing to CCAs and CCA institutions.64

iv. Indian Forest Act 1927

envfor.nic.in/legis/forest/forest4.html
The Indian Forest Act 1927 has a provision (section 28) for declaring village forests (VF), under
which the village gets powers similar to the forest department. But despite being in existence for
eight decades, this provision has hardly been implemented. No village forests exist except for a few
sites in Uttarakhand, Karnataka, and Mizoram. If implemented, this can be a strong category to
support forest CCAs, particularly forests on government lands that are currently being conserved
by the local communities. Most existing CCAs in India are not just areas under strict protection but
also areas from where biomass needs are met in a regulated manner. The village forest category
entails handing over government-controlled reserve forests to local villagers for conservation and
sustainable use and hence suits the purpose well. Many JFM villages such as Satara Tukum and
others such as Mendha (Lekha) and Saigata have been demanding that they be declared village
forests. NGOs in Orissa,65 Uttarakhand66 and Maharashtra67 have in fact suggested draft rules for
VFs in their states,68 which await a response from the government.
90 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

The Government of India’s Steering Committee on Environment, Forests & Wildlife for the
Eleventh Five-Year Plan (2007-2012), has very strongly recommended that the village forests
category be used for giving legal backing to existing JFM sites as well as to other initiatives of the
communities towards conservation of forests.69

v. Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act 1996

panchayat.nic.in/PESA.htm
The Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act 1996 (PESA) was passed in order to empower
the communities that inhabit Schedule V areas (those which are largely inhabited by tribal
communities and are listed in the constitution). These areas were only partially accessible to the
British and therefore difficult to administer, and were called ‘partially excluded’. These areas are
also rich in terms of natural resources such as forests, minerals and water, and the people living
in these areas are vulnerable to exploitation.

Box 11
Highlights of the provisions of PESA
This law for the first time recognized local traditional management practices and conferred a
number of rights on local tribal institutions:
1. State legislation on the panchayats should be in consonance with the customary law, social
and religious practices and traditional management practices of community resources.
2. Every gram sabha shall be competent to safeguard and preserve the traditions and customs
of the people, their cultural identity, community resources and the customary mode of
dispute resolution.
3. The gram sabha or the panchayats at the appropriate level shall be consulted before
acquiring land in Schedule V Areas for development projects and before resettling or
rehabilitating persons affected by such projects in Schedule V Areas; the actual planning
and implementation of the projects in Schedule V Areas shall be co-ordinated at the state
level.
4. Planning and management of minor water bodies in Schedule V Areas shall be entrusted to
the panchayat at the appropriate level.
5. The recommendations of the gram sabha or the panchayats at the appropriate level shall be
made mandatory prior to grant of prospecting licenses or mining leases for minor minerals
in the Scheduled Areas.
6. The prior recommendation of the gram sabha or the panchayats at the appropriate level
shall be made mandatory for grant of concession for the exploration of minor minerals by
auction.
7. While endowing panchayats in the Scheduled Areas with such powers and authority as
may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of self-government, a state
legislature shall ensure that the panchayats at the appropriate level and the gram sabhas
are endowed specifically with:
(i) Ownership of minor forest produce (or what is called non-timber forest produce or
NTFP),
(ii) Power to prevent alienation of land in the Scheduled Areas and to take appropriate action
to restore any unlawfully alienated land of a Scheduled Tribe;
(iii)Power to exercise control over institutions and functionaries in all social sectors; and
(iv)Control over local plans and resources for such plans including tribal sub-plans

Despite (or may be because of!) having some revolutionary provisions, this Act has not been
implemented in most states, and where implemented has not been effective because of a number
of reasons such as:
1. State governments subverting the powers provided to the gram sabha by diluting the provisions
of the central act in their state adaptations. For example, states like Maharashtra have excluded
 Overview 91

commercially important NTFP like tendu patta (leaves of Diospyros melanoxylon), one of the
important sources of income for many communities, from the purview of local ownership.
2. Lack of clarity about the area under the jurisdiction of the gram sabha, particularly the issue of
whether all the provisions mentioned above are applicable only to lands under the legal ownership
of the village, or also government lands where customary usage, rights and interactions exist.
3. Lack of political and administrative will amongst states to implement the Act.
4. Lack of information about the provisions of the Act among the local inhabitants.
5. Limited applicability, since it is restricted only to Schedule V areas and not available in non-
tribal areas, or even in states which have some tribal population but no Schedule V areas.

vi. Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest-Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights)
Act 200670
(tribal.nic.in/bill.pdf, tribal.nic.in/rules-190607.pdf)
This Act is an outcome of long-standing demands from indigenous/tribal and other forest-dwelling
communities for recognition of their rights on forest lands occupied by them and resources or on
which they depend for subsistence. The Act mandates establishment of such rights for tribal and
forest-dependent communities.
The Act allows for a greater role and empowerment of gram sabhas in determining claims,
managing forests they have traditionally conserved, checking processes destructive of forest-
dwellers’ habitats, and protecting traditional knowledge. It also allows for greater livelihood
security for traditional forest-dwellers who have been unjustly denied tenure, and mandates that
any displacement and relocation can only happen by consent. It provides a greater possibility of
community involvement in government-managed PAs. If applied meaningfully and transparently,
this Act could lead towards many forms of co-management and to greater livelihood security
than is possible in current management regimes of forests, including in the national parks and
sanctuaries in India.
Additionally, community forest is a category under which the local communities can protect any
forest that they have been traditionally protecting and can establish locally suitable institutions, rules
and regulations. This kind of flexibility is not available in other acts to the conserving communities,
and could therefore be of significant use to CCAs. Unfortunately the rules notified under the Act (in
January 2008) do not elaborate how to opportunalise this provision.
Weaknesses include the fact that ‘encroachments’ on forest lands upto December 2005 are
eligible for regularization. This has given rise to possibilities of misuse by vested interests, who are
reportedly inciting people to encroach even in 2007 and claim it to be pre-December 2005 occupation.
Certain development projects and activities (e.g., construction of roads) for the purpose of village
development have been excluded from forest clearances under the Indian Forest Conservation Act
198071. This opens up a potential for misuse at some sites to allow destructive projects in forest
areas. Also this Act has an unclear relationship with existing forest/wildlife laws. The institutional
arrangements for enforcement of the forest management and conservation provisions of the Act
are also not very clear epecially in relation to areas where the forest department has existing
jurisdiction. Although the rights would now rest with the local people, there is unclear provision to
assign conservation responsibilities on right-holders and gram sabhas.
Amongst all the new laws relevant to CCAs in India, this Act has the largest possible implications
(at least for forested CCAs) and its implementation therefore needs to be closely followed.

vii. Environmental Protection Act 1986

This Act allows the declaration of stretches of ecosystems as Ecologically Sensitive Areas (ESA).
Declaration of ESAs means that certain identified commercial, industrial and development activities
would not be allowed in the area. There are several ESAs in the country, but none of the CCAs are
covered under this category as yet.
The Act is a strong legal tool to fight against commercial and industrial pressures. However,
communities know very little about this Act and how it can be used. Its relevance for CCAs has not
been really tested and understood on the ground as yet.
92 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

viii. Are there any state-specific laws that can be relevant for CCAs?
There are some state specific laws and policies which are more appropriate for CCAs. For example,
The Village Council Act 1978 of Nagaland is one of the strongest state legislations in the country,
providing communities the right to manage their own lands. To be able to do so, the community
is free to constitute any appropriate local institution. There are a number of community-owned
and -declared protected areas in this state (see Nagaland state chapter and case studies from the
state).

8.2. What spaces are available for CCAs in Indian policies and plans?
i. National Wildlife Action Plan (2002-2016)
projecttiger.nic.in/actionplan.htm
The National Wildlife Action Plan provides significant space for community participation in
conservation, particularly in PAs. Some of these commitments include:
1. Evolving and prescribing guidelines for local community involvement in different management
zones of PAs and adjacent areas. These guidelines would complement the WII guidelines for
planning PA management and ecologically sound community welfare programmes.
2. Designing people’s participation schemes for all PAs by focusing upon landless families so as to
provide them gainful employment, particularly through NTFP.
3. Developing and implementing guidelines for providing incentives and measures for benefit-
sharing among local communities.
4. Formulating schemes for conflict management, especially for loss of life and livestock and crop
damage.
5. Providing a range of incentives to conserve wildlife in different landscapes across different land
and water uses: rewards and public honour for commendable conservation work and actions,
granting of biomass and water resource rights for personal consumption for communities that
have helped protect or restore wildlife habitats, employment in local conservation works,
financial rewards and incentives to protect sacred groves, share in penalties extracted from
poachers, share in tourism revenues, and incentives to move away from ecologically ill-advised
activities.
6. Encouraging people to help protect and manage wildlife habitats outside PAs (including
community-conserved forests, wetlands, grasslands and coastal areas).
All these action points have been mentioned with a time frame in the Plan. However, more than
five years after the plan came into existence little effort has been made towards its implementation.
As described above, the legal tools to achieve such implementation remain weak or undeveloped.

ii. National Forest Policy 1988

http://envfor.nic.in/divisions/fp/nfp.pdf
This policy deals with conservation and management of forests, afforestation and with the rules
governing people’s access to government-owned forests and their products. This policy, for the
first time after independence, placed greater importance on using local forest resources to meet
local people’s needs rather than the industrial needs. It was under this that the government
resolution on JFM was passed in 1990. Since then millions of hectares of forests outside PAs have
been brought under JFM, aimed at regenerating degraded forests with the participation of local
communities and sharing the benefits accruing from timber harvests from these areas with the
local communities. JFM has been a failure in some states and sites while it has been successful in
others, depending on the state policies and the on-site methods of implementation.
The policy insists on the involvement of local people in the management of forests. Moreover,
the need for their access to the forests and resources on which their livelihoods depend has been
recognized. However, the policy has not been adequately translated into law till recently; hence
many of its progressive provisions remain unimplemented. It is to be seen whether the new Forest
Rights Act (see Section 8.1.vi above) would help achieve this.

iii. Final Report of the Steering Committee on Environment and Forest Sector, 11th 5 Year
Plan (2007-2011), March 2007.
www.planningcommission.nic.in/about us/committee/strgrp11/str11_6.htm
 Overview 93

The draft 11th Five-Year plan based on the recommendations of the Steering Committee on
Environment and Forest Sector :
‘CCAs (such as sacred groves, heronries and wintering wetlands, catchment forests, turtle nesting
sites, pastures for wild herbivores, etc) exist in a wide spectrum of legal regimes ranging from
government owned lands (owned/controlled by forest department, revenue department, irrigation
dept. or others) to community/panchayat/tribal council/clan lands, as well as private owned lands.
Such CCAs may not necessarily be officially notified but should still be eligible for financial and other
kinds of support as an incentive for community-led conservation practices. Most critically, while
there are many forest-based CCAs, there are also several CCAs that are in grassland, montane,
coastal and freshwater ecosystems. Support to such CCAs will ensure coverage to relatively
neglected ecosystems and taking the focus of conservation attention beyond forests. It is proposed
that separate budgetary support may be made available to such initiatives, while considering an
appropriate legal status for them as available in the Wild Life Act (Community Reserves), Biological
Diversity Act (Heritage Sites), ST and Other Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act
(community conserved forests), and Environment Protection Act (ecosensitive areas), without
imposing changes in the institutional arrangements that communities have developed for managing
them. The MoEF has commissioned a Directory of CCAs72 and an initial prioritisation from this may
be used for providing funding support to CCAs that appear to be conserving critically threatened
wildlife or ecosystems, or are in other ways important for wildlife and biodiversity.’
If taken into account and implemented effectively, this could mean substantial attention and
support for CCAs in the next five years.

Box 12
The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP)
The process of drafting India’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) was
started in the year 2000. Prepared in a highly participatory manner, over 50,000 people have
participated in the preparation of the plan. This plan was submitted as the final technical report
to the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), Government of India, by the Technical
Coordinator in 2004. The plan has not been accepted by the government. What the final plan
would be is quite unclear at this stage. However, the Final Technical Report recognises CCAs
and emphasises legal, administrative and all other kinds of support to these areas.

Source: Kalpavriksh and Technical and Policy Core Group (TPCG), Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report
of the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP). Prepared by Technical and Policy Core Group, Delhi/
Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005

8.3. International context and support for Community Conserved

Areas73
Recognition of the existence and importance of community conserved areas (CCAs) has been
rather recent, both in national and international circles. But it has also rapidly occupied central
focus, largely due to two key international events in 2003-04: the World Parks Congress (WPC) in
September 2003, and the 7th Conference of Parties of the CBD in February 2004. The discussions,
decisions, and outputs of these events have firmly established the role of community-based
approaches to protected area management and conservation, and in particular the role of CCAs in
achieving biodiversity conservation.
1. The 5th WPC, organised in Durban in September 2003 by the World Conservation Union (IUCN),
was the biggest-ever gathering of conservationists, with over 5000 participants. Amongst its
major outputs were the Durban Accord and Action Plan, the Message to the CBD, and over
thirty recommendations on specific topics. All these strongly stressed the need to centrally
involve indigenous peoples and local communities in conservation, including respecting their
customary and territorial rights, and their right to a central role in decision-making. The biggest
breakthrough was the recognition of CCAs as a valid and important form of conservation.
The Durban Action Plan, with a specific recommendation on CCAs, highlighted the need to
incorporate and support CCAs as part of national PA systems. (see www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/
wpc2003, for copies of these documents)
2. The 7th Conference of Parties to the CBD, held in Kuala Lumpur in February 2004, had ‘protected
areas’ as one of its main topics. Since the CBD is a legally binding instrument, its outputs are
94 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

of great significance for all countries. One of its main outputs was a detailed and ambitious
Programme of Work (POW) on PAs. A crucial element of the POW related to ‘Governance,
Participation, Equity, and Benefit-sharing’ explicitly urges countries to move towards participatory
conservation with recognition of indigenous/local community rights. As in the case of the WPC,
the POW also made a major breakthrough in committing countries to identify, recognise, and
support CCAs (see www.biodiv.org, to download the POW).
3. The World Conservation Congress of IUCN, held in Bangkok in November 2004, re-affirmed the
outputs of the WPC Durban, and a specific recommendation on CCAs was adopted.
4. The first marine protected areas congress, held in Geelong, Australia, in October 2005, reinforced
the message from the WPC Durban, with specific reference to marine sites.
In all the above processes, a key role was played by the IUCN Strategic Direction on Governance,
Communities, Equity and Livelihoods (TILCEPA) formerly known as the Theme on Indigenous and
Local Communities, Equity, and Protected Areas. TILCEPA is a working group of two commissions
of the World Conservation Union (IUCN), the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) and
the Commission on Environmental, Economic, and Social Policy (CEESP). TILCEPA coordinated the
Communities and Equity cross-cutting theme at the WPC and the Marine Parks Congress, both of
which included several case studies and analytical inputs on CCAs. Of great significance was its role
in facilitating the participation of community representatives from CCA sites from different parts of
the world. TILCEPA members were also a part of an expert group set up by the CBD Secretariat, to
make inputs to the draft Programme of Work for discussion at the Kuala Lumpur COP. It is because
of this involvement that a separate section on ‘Governance, Participation, Equity, and Benefit-
sharing’ was added. This section included specific action points on CCAs.
The secretariat of TILCEPA has since its inception been housed in Kalpavriksh, with one of
its members being the co-chair. The information and learning generated by Kalpavriksh’s work
on CCAs in India and other countries of South Asia was used as a base for TILCEPA’s inputs to
the WPC and the CBD Conference of Parties. This included some specific case studies that were
generated or expanded during the work on the CCA Directory, and key lessons that emerged from
the work on various CCA examples. It also included drafting a Policy Brief ‘CCAs: A Bold Frontier for
Conservation’,74 and a note on ‘How Can We Support CCAs?’, published by TILCEPA for circulation
to delegates to the CBD Conference of Parties.
In 2006, a global initiative was started by TILCEPA to support and promote CCAs. The initiative
seeks to deepen the understanding of the CCA phenomenon with respect to varying historical/
regional contexts; to identify field-based crucial initiatives where CCAs can be safeguarded,
enabled, strengthened and/or promoted in practice; and to support consequent national, regional
and international policy, in particular through the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas
and the Millennium Development Goal follow up mechanisms. Also TILCEPA is putting together a
global picture of the current state of national legislation and policy, regarding CCAs in different
countries.75 A special issue of the magazine PARKS on CCAs was produced in 2006.76
The India CCA Directory is likely to be the first nationwide survey of CCAs, and has therefore
become an example for other countries to learn from and generate their own national surveys. Such
a process would help to implement the outputs and decisions of the above-mentioned international
events.

9. Conclusion and way ahead

In these times when biological diversity is under grave threat globally and nationally, and
economic and development policies are aimed at maximum profit with little regard for nature or
natural resources, conservation efforts of local communities gain immense significance. The case
studies presented in this Directory indicate that a few communities in India have been able to
resolve some of the dilemmas facing conservation although many still need to be resolved. This
is not to say that all local communities everywhere are involved in conservation but that given
the right kind of facilitating environment there is an immense potential for local communities to
become the biggest allies in conservation, as indeed many of them have been at various points in
history.
Unfortunately, till recently the potential of these initiatives in achieving conservation has remained
seriously underutilised in formal conservation programmes. Although most individual CCAs still
remain unrecognised, the term CCAs is beginning to find place in conservation debates, discourses,
and policy statements nationally and internationally. Some factors that have contributed to their
recognition in recent times include:
 Overview 95

• A more vocal demand for recognition by the conserving communities themselves, and by
grassroots organisations working with them, such as Vasundhara and RCDC in Orissa, Kashtakari
Sangathana and Vrikshmitra in Maharashtra, and Seva and Viksat in Gujarat.
• Efforts by NGOs and individuals to promote and facilitate local community action for conservation,
including the Nature Conservation Foundation, World Wide Fund for Nature - India, Wildlife Trust
of India, Samrakshan, Ashoka Trust for Research on Ecology and Environment, Foundation for
Ecological Security, Kalpavriksh and others, and researchers from institutions such as Salim Ali
Centre for Ornithology and Nature Conservation, and Wildlife Institute of India.
• Documentation and popularisation through write-ups, news reports and presentations on CCAs
at national and international forums by organisations such as Kalpavriksh, Centre for Science
and Environment and others.
• Extension of legal and other assistance to CCAs by the above-mentioned NGOs and lobbying for
greater governmental and legal support for such initiatives by the above-mentioned organisations
and many others. As a result, the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act 2002 incorporated two
new types of protected areas: Community Reserves and Conservation Reserves. The 11th Five-
Year Plan has put CCAs squarly in its ambit, and the Wildlife Action Plan talks about recognition
of CCAs.
• International lobbying with the help of international networks and NGOs such as TILCEPA,
CEESP, WPC 2004, CBD and many others.
However, this recognition has not yet translated itself into an actual policy on the ground, or
into legal, political, or administrative recognition and support. This lack of recognition in the
context of the fast-track process of globalization and industrialization, changing value systems and
aspirations, and fast-changing demographic and socio-economic profiles has led to serious threats
to many CCAs. Communities need much internal strengthening and external support to be able to
deal with such threats. Effective support could come in some of the following ways.

Greater recognition and support

• Documenting and bringing out more such examples and their role in conservation.
• Developing more detailed maps using GIS, possibly through a series of site-specific workshops
with the local communities to seek their inputs. We hope that these maps would be used by the
concerned communities for the effective management of the conserved sites.
• Maintaining and updating the existing database on CCAs.
• Continuing to lobby for recognition, and effective legal, administrative and political support of
CCAs.
• Creating national, state or sub-state systems and/or institutions for continuous support, guidance
and monitoring of CCAs. This could include support and facilitation of regional cooperation and
the building of coalitions/federations among CCAs or newer bodies similar to those of State
Wildlife Advisory Boards constituted under Wild Life Protection Act.
• Reducing costs of conservation by helping communities resolve conflicts with powerful offenders,
particularly those from outside the community, providing critical financial and other support.
• Supporting local institutions, systems, rules and regulations, and giving such rules and regulations
the status of statutory provisions.
• Helping to strengthen local institutions and facilitating greater equity and transparency in their
decision-making process.
• Formulation of management plans for conserved resources and species, a need often expressed
by the communities.
• Facilitating the adaptation of appropriate ecologically friendly technologies for enhancing their
livelihoods, and where appropriate, linkages with consumers and sensitive markets in order to
generate resources. This includes developing fair and equitable models of eco-tourism. Such
interventions should however be carried out with a strong precaution that new technologies and
markets can also cause disruption and damage, if not carefully controlled!
• Action to tackle the critical threats and challenges facing these initiatives, including those
emanating from the communities themselves, such as inequities in decision-making and benefit-
sharing, and those emanating from external forces such as unsustainable ‘development’ and
commercialization.
96 Community conserved areas in India - a directory

Technical support related to ecological, social, and economic issues

• Conducting some detailed studies on the ecological and other aspect of CCAs to help them
establish their role in conservation. Such studies will also help communities resolve issues related
to specific species and their needs, and impacts of extraction of resources on biodiversity. Such
studies would also help communities formulate management plans for their sites, helping them to
regulate use and manage ecosystems more effectively. Often community members themselves
would be interested in carrying out such studies with technical help and guidance from outside
experts.
• Training in appropriate resource/wildlife management, monitoring techniques, basic accounting,
marketing, management and leadership skills.
• Help in reducing human-wildlife conflicts, particularly to deal with damage to crops, livestock,
and property. Communities usually do not want to take retaliatory action in such cases, but
unless urgent supportive measures are considered by governments and NGOs, their tolerance
levels may be crossed if the damage increases.
• Conducting awareness and training programmes for communities on the importance of biodiversity
conservation in the national and global context, gender and social equity, and local governance
issues.
• Supporting youth (leadership) programmes, and other local conservation groups and initiatives.
• Providing social recognition and awards to exemplary CCA initiatives.

Legal and policy measures

• Bringing about changes in existing policies and laws to further facilitate and enable community-
based approaches, and, meanwhile, preparing clearer guidelines to maximize the available
spaces in these policies and laws. This includes amendment of the community reserves provision
of the Wild Life Act to encompass community-conserved government lands as also to empower
a diversity of community institutions. Among the critical changes/strengthening needed is in the
area of tenurial rights and responsibilities of local communities over natural resources.
• Incorporating of community-based approaches into relevant conservation schemes and
programmes, including through the orientation of staff implementing these programmes.
• Through a consultative process, developing and finalising guidelines for legally and otherwise
supporting CCAs where they exist, and facilitating their replication in other areas.
A question that needs to be addressed is whether national policies relating to natural resources
can be built around the kind of a pace and diversity as reflected by CCAs? If yes, how? If the
pace needs to be changed, what are the factors that need urgent attention? Should a greater
role as an extension officer by the government agencies be considered? Villagers often do not
seem to have the time or the resources to carry the initiative out on their own or to sustain it
beyond a point. Situations are often more complex than may appear in this overview. At the same
time, communities must be credited for having resolved important issues, such as encroachments,
destructive commercial exploitation of resources, over-exploitation of resources, and so on.
Therefore it is important to stress the fact that these efforts despite their limitations are viewed
as positive processes. Obstacles faced should not be viewed as failures but as constraints, which
can be solved within the concerned social and ecological context. Such obstacles and constraints
should also not be used as an excuse to not provide CCAs the recognition and support that they
deserve. This may take longer than normal ‘project or programme cycles’, yet may prove more
sustainable in the long run.
One of the most critical lessons we learn from CCAs is that areas important for biodiversity
conservation are often also important for the survival and livelihood security of traditional
communities. The issue of people within and around official protected areas has plagued
conservationists for decades. Increasingly there is recognition that livelihoods will need to be
integrated without compromising the existence of ecosystems and species. Many CCAs provide
valuable insights into how this can be done. It is also important to realise, however, that all of
these initiatives cannot be extrapolated to other areas without appropriate changes. In order
to arrive at a participatory conservation system in the country, it is crucial to understand the
strengths and limitations of such initiatives and evolve workable models for a particular site. One
important path towards wildlife conservation is to first meet people’s most critical survival needs,
like water and biomass, and tie up biodiversity imperatives with these. To be able to do this
effectively, an area will have to be looked at as part of a larger landscape and planned for through
 Overview 97

fair and transparent participatory processes, taking into account commercial development, local
livelihoods and conservation.
No single agency is capable of saving India’s biodiversity including its wildlife. The FD, even if
highly motivated, has simply too few resources, manpower and knowledge. Local communities
often find themselves helpless in the face of powerful internal and outside forces, while most
NGOs are too small to handle the complex and enormous problems that natural habitats face.
So the solution is to combine the strengths of each of these…and to help each other to tackle
weaknesses.

Endnotes
1
Many thanks to Ashish Kothari, Tejaswini Apte, Seema Bhatt, Sharmila Deo, and Aparna Watve for their valuable
inputs and critical comments. Also thanks to Saili Palande for helping in preparing the database tables and generating
pie charts and bar charts, and Persis Taraporewala and Erica Taraporewala for help at various stages.
2
V. Saberwal, M. Rangarajan, and A. Kothari, People, Parks and Wildlife: Towards Coexistence (New Delhi, Orient
Longman, 2001).
3
Areas designated by the government under specific laws for protection of wildlife.
4
M.D.S. Chandran, ‘Review of Sacred Groves in Kodagu District of Karnataka (South India): A Socio-historical study
by M.A. Kalam’, South Indian Studies, 3, Jan-June 1997.
5
U.M. Chandrashekhara, and S. Shankar, ‘Structure and functions of sacred groves: case studies in Kerala’, in P.S.
Ramakrishnan, K.G. Saxena and U.M. Chandrashekhara (eds), Conserving the Sacred for Biodiversity Management
(New Delhi, Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 1998).
6
K. Das and K.C. Malhotra, ‘Sacred Groves Among the Tribes of India: A Literature Survey of Ethnographic Monographs’
(Integrated Rural Development of Weaker Sections in India, Semiliguda, Mimeo., 1998).
7
M. Gadgil, ‘Traditional conservation practices’, in A.N. William (ed.), Encyclopedia of Environment Biology, Volume
3, (California, Academic Press, 1995).
8
M. Gadgil and R. Guha, This Fissured Land: An Ecological History of India (Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1992);
M. Gadgil and V.D. Vartak, ‘Sacred Groves of Western Ghats of India’, Economic Botany (1976), 30: 152-160.
9
In A. Kothari, N. Singh, and S. Suri, (eds.), People and Protected Areas: Towards Participatory Conservation in India
(New Delhi, Sage Publications, 1996).
10
A. Godbole, A. Watve, S. Prabhu, and J. Sarnaik, ‘Role of sacred groves in conservation with local people’s
participation: A case study from Ratnagiri District, Maharashtra’, in Ramakrishnan et al. (eds), Conserving the Sacred
for Biodiversity Management. (as above)
11
Y. Gokhale, ‘Management of Kans in the Western Ghats of Karnataka’, in U. Shaanker, R. Ganeshaiah, K.N. Bawa
and K.S. Bawa (eds), Forest Genetic Resources: Status, Threats and Conservation Strategies (Delhi, Oxford and IBH
Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd, 2001).
12
M.A. Kalam, Sacred Groves in Kodagu District of Karnataka, Pondy Paper on Social Sciences (French Institute,
Pondicherry, 2001).
13
C.G. Kushalappa and S.A. Bhagwat, ’Sacred Groves: Biodiversity, Threats and Conservation’,in U. Shaanker et al.
(eds), Forest Genetic Resources. (as above)
14
Areas protected for wildlife under the Indian Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972, mainly national parks and wildlife
sanctuaries.
15
Van panchayats (VP) or the executive village committees for management of forests were established by the British
in 1931 and a large number of these continue to manage their forests effectively even today (for more details see
Uttarakhand chapter).
16
A Hindu festival celebrated as the victory of good over evil, mostly by bursting crackers and lighting earthen
lamps.
17
Forest patches of near-natural vegetation dedicated to ancestral spirits/deities, and protected on the basis of
religious beliefs.
18
This is similar to an internationally used definition of CCAs see, www.tilcepa.org.
19
A. Kothari, N. Pathak, and F. Vania, Where Communities Care: Community-based Wildlife and Ecosystem
Management in South Asia (Kalpavriksh, Pune and International Institute of Environment and Development, London,
2000).
20
Which may or may not be recognized by the national legal system.
21
See Annexure 1 for the tabular database used for analysis in this section.
22
A scheme of the Government of Maharashtra inspired by the work of Anna Hazare, where villages are given
financial awards for following the principles of Adarsh Gaon (model village). These principles include Kulhad Band
(felling ban), Charai Band (ban on free grazing), Nasha Band (ban on alcohol), Nas Band (family planning), and
Shramdaan (volunteering labour, time and effort for social good).
98 Community conserved areas in India - a directory
23
A movement started by legendary social worker Vinoba Bhave in 1951 aimed at equitable distribution of land
and resources. As part of this movement many large land holders gave up their land for the sake of landless. This
movement also encouraged the villages to consider their village land as common property so that resources could be
shared equitably among all members.
24
www.wwfindia.org
25
www.samrakshan.org
26
Joint Forest Management is a country-wide programme of the forest department aimed at regeneration of degraded
forests with the help of the local communities. The programme envisages that the benefits from all kinds of harvests
in such forests would be shared with the involved community.
27
A very good example is from Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (KMTR) in Tamil Nadu or Periyar National Park
in Kerala, where, despite the inherent limitations of the ecodevelopment programme, the team of officials have gone
beyond their mandate to involve local people in the protection of the PA and ensure that people benefit from the
jointly envisaged activities under the programme. The efforts of the ecodevelopment team have been so successful
that those involved with poaching and timber felling are now strengthening the hands of the government in protection
against such activities. Women around Periyar have responded to these initiatives by voluntarily patrolling the forests
on a daily basis. These are not examples from CCAs but have been mentioned to illustrate the important role that
sensitive government officials can play in mobilising communities for the cause of conservation.
28
Over the last 15 years or more JFM has spread ofver several million hectares. However, while it has been very
successful in many places, the programme suffers from a number of deficiencies:the power-sharing between the
FD and villagers remains poor, benefits to communities have often been inequitably shared, corruption is often very
high, and in places traditional institutions of management have been displaced by JFM committees imposed from
above.
29
Entitlements from the forests to daily biomass needs for the people residing in and around forest areas (under
government jurisdiction).
30
Meeting daily biomass needs for personal consumption.
31
There are many examples across the country where representative bodies have been set up by external agencies
for conservation with little interaction, consent or acceptance of the local communities. However, we have not taken
into account such examples as CCAs so they would not figure in this analysis.
32
This section on international debates on whether CCAs are PAs is adapted from a note prepared by Ashish Kothari,
based on inputs from Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend, Hanna Jaireth, Gonzalo Oviedo, Adrian Phillips, and Marshall
Murphree. It was written for The IUCN Theme on Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities, Equity and Protected
Areas. Contact: ashishkothari@vsnl.com, gbf@cenesta.org, or tilcepa@vsnl.net.
33
In Kothari et al. (eds), People and Protected Areas (As above)
34
Note prepared by Neema Pathak, Seema Bhatt, Tasneem Huzefa, and Ashish Kothari, with inputs from Gonzalo Oviedo
and Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend, on behalf of the IUCN CEESP-WCPA Theme on Indigenous and Local Communities,
Equity, and Protected Areas (TILCEPA). Kalpavriksh, Pune (Kalpavriksh@vsnl.net) and Cenesta (cenesta@cenesta.
org), Iran.
35
See case study sections for the relevant states for details on the case studies mentioned here.
36
C. Leisher, P. van Beukering and L.M. Scherl, Nature’s Investment Bank: How Marine Protected Areas Contribute
to Poverty Reduction. (Arlington, USA, The Nature Conservancy, 2007)
Policy Matters 15: Conservation and Human Rights. Magazine of the IUCN Commission on Environmental, Economic,
and Social Policy. July 2007. http://www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/publications/publications.htm
M. Lockwood, G. Worboys, and A. Kothari, (eds), Managing Protected Areas: A Global Guide. (London, IUCN, Gland
and Earthscan, 2006)
M. Colchester, (Conservation policy and indigenous peoples) Environment Science and Policy, 7: 145-153 (2004).
37
R. Kutty, ‘Community-based Conservation of Sea Turtle Nesting Sites in India: Some Case Studies’, in K. Shankar
and B.C. Choudhury (eds), Marine Turtles of the Indian Subcontinent (Dehradun, Government of India-UNDP and
Wildlife Institute of India, 2006).
38
Political benefits entail the self-empowerment of communities, including the power to negotiate terms with
government and non-government agencies.
39
Examples with more than one benefit have been mentioned in all relevant benefit fields in Figure 16
40
Adapted from a similar table in Kothari et al., Where Communities Care (As above)
41
This is not an exhaustive list of examples, but only some randomly selected ones.
42
Foundation for Ecological Security, A Biodiversity and strategy input document: The Gori River Basin Western
Himalaya, Prepared under the National Strategy and Action Plan, India. Submitted to the Ministry of Environment and
Forests, New Delhi (2003). Kalpavriksh and Technical and Policy Core Group (TPCG), Securing India’s Future: Final
Technical Report of the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP). Prepared by Technical and Policy
Core Group, Delhi/Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005.
43
R. Kutty, ‘Community-based Conservation of Sea Turtle Nesting Sites in India’ (As above)
44
R. Jackson, and R. Wangchuk, ‘A Community-based Approach to Mitigating Livestock Depredation by Snow
Leopards’, Human Dimensions of Wildlife (2004), 9: 307-15.
 Overview 99
45
M. Sarin, with L. Ray, M.S. Raju, M. Chatterjee, N. Banerjee and S. Hiremath, Who is Gaining? Who is Losing?
Gender and Equity Concerns in Joint Forest Management, (New Delhi, Gender and Equity Sub-Group, National
Support Group for JFM, Society for Promotion of Wasteland Development, 1996).
46
For more details on social stratification and its implication on conservation efforts see A. Kothari, F. Vania, P. Das,
K. Christopher and S. Jha (eds), Building Bridges for Conservation: Towards Joint Management of India’s Protected
Areas (New Delhi, Indian Institute of Public Administration, 1996); N. Pathak, Joint Forest Management and Gender:
Women’s Participation and Benefit-sharing in JFM in India’, A report prepared for ADITHI, a women’s organisation in
Patna, Bihar (2000).
47
As above
48
These key issues and lessons are based on the analysis in the previous sections as well as other work and past
experience of Kalpavriksh, including:
A. Kothari et al., Where Communities Care (As above)
While this Directory was being compiled, a number of other reports were written and /or published, which were to
some extent based on the learnings from the Directory. These include:
A. Kothari and N. Pathak, Protected Areas, Community Based Conservation and Decentralisation: Lessons from India,
A Report Prepared for the Ecosystems, Protected Areas, and People Project (EPP) of the IUCN World Commission on
Protected Areas (through the IUCN Regional Protected Areas Programme, Asia) (2006).
49
This table has been adapted from a more detailed table in G. Borrini-Feyerabend, A. Kothari and G. Oviedo,
Indigenous and Local Communities and Protected Areas: Towards Equity and Enhanced Conservation. (Gland,
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, IUCN, 2004).
50
A. Kothari et al., Where Communities Care (As above)
51
P. Pardeshi, ‘Conserving Maharashtra’s Biodiversity through Ecodevelopment’, in A. Kothari et al. (eds), People and
Protected Areas (As above)
52
A. Kothari and N. Pathak, Protected Areas, Community Based Conservation and Decentralisation. (As above)
53
CMWG and TILCEPA, ‘A Policy Briefing note on Governance of Natural Resources–the Key to a Just World that
Values and Conserves Nature’. For details see www.tilcepa.org or contact Grazia Borrini-Fereyabend at gbf@cenesta.
org.
54
A Government of India scheme, funded in this case by the Global Environment Facility, meant for diverting human
pressures from a PA by providing alternative sources of livelihood.
55
D. Priya, ‘The Politics of Participatory Conservation - the case of the Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary, Rajasthan’. G.
Shahabuddin and M Rangarajan (eds), Making Conservation Work (New Delhi, Permanent Black, 2007)
56
R. Panigrahi, ‘Democratisation of Forest Governance: Myths and Realities (An analysis of implications of
democratized forest policies and processes in Orissa, India)’ Paper presented at the eleventh Biennial Conference for
the International Association for the Study of Common Property, 19-23rd June 2006, Bali, Indonesia (Vasundhara,
Bhubaneshwar, R. 1996).
57
M. Sarin, ‘Empowering and Disempowering of Forest Women in Uttarakhand, India’, Gender, Technology and
Development Journal (2001), 5 (3).
58
N. Pathak and V. Gour-Broome, Tribal Self-Rule and Natural Resource Management: Community Based Conservation
at Mendha-Lekha, Maharashtra, India (Kalpavriksh, Pune and International Institute of Environment and Development,
London, 2000).
59
ATREE, An Integrated Approach to Management of Tropical Forests for Non-Timber Forest Products. Annual Report
for Biodiversity Conservation Network (Bangalore, Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment,
1999).
60
A. Kothari et al., Where Communities Care. (As above)
61
Kalpavriksh has drafted a set of guidelines for the declaration of Community Reserves. These guidelines were
circulated for comments by MoEF to the state governments in 2005, but subsequent action is unclear.
62
A detailed critique was made in a letter related to the concerns regarding Biological Diversity Rules 2004, addressed
to National Biodiversity Authority and Shri Thiru A. Raja, Minister of Environment and Forests. Written by Ashish
Kothari, Kalpavriksh, Pune; P.V. Satheesh, Deccan Development Society and AP Coalition in Defence of Diversity,
Hyderabad; Utkarsh Ghate, RANWA, Pune; and Madhu Sarin, Chandigarh. Dated 6th June 2004. Contact: Kanchi Kohli
at kanchikohli@gmail.com.
63
Kalpavriksh has formulated draft guidelines for Biodiversity Heritage Sites and submitted to National Biodiversity
Authority for consideration, in 2006.
64
For regular update on the implementation of the Biodiversity Act, see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/
bioDWatch.
65
‘Orissa Village Forest (Amendments) Rules, 2007 (A Draft). A Civil Society Organisation’s Initiative’. For details
contact Abhishek Pratap at vasundharanr@satyam.net.in
66
For more details, contact Tarun Joshi, Sainyon Ka Sangathana, Nagari Gaon, Post Bhavali, Dist. Nainital 263132,
Uttarakhand. Tel. 05942-220714/220255.
67
For details contact Mohan Hirabai Hiralal at mohanhh@gmail.com
100 Community conserved areas in India - a directory
68
Contact Mohan Hirabai Hiralal (As above).
69
Planning Commission, Final report of the Steering Committee on Environment, Forests & Wildlife for the Eleventh
Five Year Plan (2007-2012) (Planning Commission, Government of India, March 2007).
70
Also see Kalpavriksh’s note ‘Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest-Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act
2006: Critical amendments, clear rules, and assessment period needed. Kalpavriksh Position and Recommendations’,
March, 2007. For more details see www.kalpavriksh.org or contact Neema Pathak at the editorial address.
71
Which prohibits diversion of forests for non forestry purposes without central government clearance.
72
Reference to this Directory.
73
Information contributed by Ashish Kothari with inputs from Tasneem Balasinorwala, Kalpavriksh, Pune.
74
See www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/Wkg_grp/TILCEPA/CCA%20Briefing%20Note.pdf.
75
See http://www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/CCAlegislations.htm.
76
See www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/pubs/parks.htm#parks161.
Andhra Pradesh
Community conservation in Andhra Pradesh
Neema Pathak

1. Background
1.1. Geographic profile
Andhra Pradesh lies between 12º37’ and 19º54’ N latitude and 76º46’ and 84º46’ E longitude,
with Tamil Nadu to the south, Orissa to the north, Maharashtra and Karnataka to the west, and the
Bay of Bengal on the east. It has a geographical area of 276,000 sq km. Out of this, 63,770 sq km
(23 per cent) is classified as forest. About 40 major, medium and minor rivers flow through the
state, the most important being the Godavari, the Krishna, the Pennar and the Vamsadhara.
Andhra Pradesh can be broadly divided into three natural regions: the coastal plains, Eastern
Ghats and the Andhra plateau. The coastline of Andhra Pradesh is about 966 km long, and is
located between 13º24’ and 19º54’ N latitude and 80º02’ and 86º46’ E longitude.
The forest department controls 23 percent of the state’s area, 79 per cent of which is Reserve
Forest. 26 per cent of the official forest area lacks any forest cover. The forests are classified as
southern tropical dry deciduous and moist deciduous, and southern tropical thorn forest, with a
small percentage of littoral and mangrove forests.1. The forests are mainly in the west and north
of the state, in the semi-arid hills of the Deccan and on the borders of Orissa. Areas rich in forests
are dominated by tribal populations, which constitute 6.3 per cent of the total population of the
state.
Agriculture accounts for 40 per cent of the state’s income and provides a livelihood for 71 per
cent of its population. The major commercial crops are paddy, jowar, groundnut, tobacco, chillies,
cotton, castor and sugarcane, while these and a wide variety of millets and pulses continue also to
be grown for domestic consumption.

1.2. Socio-economic profile

Andhra Pradesh has a population of 76.2 million as per the 2001 census, of which 73 per cent is
rural and 27 per cent urban.2 This contains a diversity of tribal or adivasi communities, including the
Gonds, Kolams, Naikpods, Pradhans and Thoties. While the Gonds practiced settled cultivation, the
Kolams and Naikpods have been shifting cultivators (podu). Community livelihood has depended
heavily on the forests and the Kolams and Naikpods owe their income to the sale of non-timber
forest produce (NTFP). Tribal families or clans have custodianship of the land, but traditionally the
concept of private ownership was alien to their culture. Though there are several tribal communities,
they together consist of only 6.6 per cent of the state’s population.3 The majority of the state’s
population consists of Hindus (89 per cent)and Muslims (9 per cent).4
Andhra Pradesh is believed to have about 50,000 ha of forest land under illegal occupation.5
state chapter - andhra pradesh

Disputes over illegally occupied lands; forest reservation policies and increased restriction on
the use of the forests by local people have created deep-seated conflicts between the tribals and
the government. These conflicts have provided a fertile ground for the growth of the Naxalite6
movement.

2. A brief history of administrative control over land and

resources
2.1. Pre-independence period
Much of the state was under the rule of the Nizam7 of Hyderabad until 1948, when he was forced
to accede to the Indian Union; the remainder was under British rule till 1947.

103
104 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

2.1.1. Nizam dominions

Representatives of the Nizam, such as the Jagirdars, Watandars and Deshmukhs, played a role
similar to the Zamindars. Lands including forest tracts were awarded to them for use. Remnants of
large areas of land in non-forested areas are still under the ownership of the families of Jagirdars.
Jagir forest lands, although owned by individuals, were openly accessible to the local communities
for collection of non-timber forest produce and firewood, and in some cases even timber for
construction8. Settlement of rights for these communities was accomplished under the Hyderabad
Forest Act, 1890.
Several areas were controlled by the forest department of the Nizam’s Government, which
followed policies designed to regulate access to forests so as to regulate and exploit timber,
prevent destruction by fires and so on. Concepts of forest management do not, however, seem to
have been employed till about the end of 1800s.
Areas under the Nizam’s dominion were highly forested and inhabited largely by tribals till the
1940s. The construction of motorable roads in following decades increased access to the region
and led to the influx of migrants from outside the state. The new settlers were aggressive and
shrewd and soon occupied most of the tribal lands. Unable to assert ownership over these lands,
the tribals were pushed further into remote areas and forced to ‘encroach’ newer forest areas.
These migrations led to tribal rebellions in many parts of the Hyderabad State, forcing the Nizam
to commission a study by the famous German anthropologist F. von.Haimendorf, who documented
the pathetic condition of the tribal people, and recounted the stories of exploitation, extortion and
displacement of unassuming tribals by migrant settlers. The recommendations of this study led
to the appointment of a Special Officer to look into the grievances of the tribals. Many steps were
taken to prevent land alienation of tribals, including the redistribution of lands under illegal control
of non-tribals to the tribals.
A subsequent visit by Haimendorf in 1975 revealed a completely different story. By this time
the population ratio had reversed drastically in favour of non-tribals from adjoining states, many
of them earning their living by smuggling timber from forests. The tribals were once again under
the grip of moneylenders, dispossessed of their land, and with their life-sustaining forests badly
degraded.9

2.1.2. British dominions

Not much has been documented about the kinds of traditional forestry practices that existed
in areas of Andhra Pradesh under British dominion. Around 1770 AD the British annexed well-
forested, tribal-dominated areas, mainly in the Eastern Ghats, from small rulers and zamindars
(landlords). Most forested and ‘unclaimed’ areas (often community lands, where the community
had no wherewithal to stake a claim that was credible in the eyes of the government) came
under the control of the state, thus restricting the rights of local communities. References in the
state forest department’s records claim that effective control and management of forests was
not possible since much of the lands were also controlled by the Revenue Department, and were
distributed under traditional land titles such as pattas10 and ijaras. Management was focused on
conservation and plantation (mainly of teak and after the 1930s on other high-revenue-yielding
plants such as bamboo and katha).
Following several tribal rebellions, the hill estates were given special status, exempting them
from normal civil and judicial laws. In 1839, the Ganjam and Vaizagapatnam Act was passed,
constituting these areas as ‘Agency areas’ under the jurisdiction of a special official called the Agent
to the Governor General. This was followed by bringing these lands under the scheduled districts
Act of 1874, the Agency Tracts Interest and Land Transfer Act of 1917, and the Government of
India Act of 1935. Eventually, the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution (after Independence) marked
most of the Agency area as a legally distinct entity (called Schedule V areas), and the Panchayat
(Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act 1996 has special provisions for these areas. These legislations
were ostensibly passed to protect the interests of local tribals against outside traders, settlers and
moneylenders. Muttadars (hereditary local chiefs) were appointed to administer these areas but
they had no ownership over the land. Their main responsibilities included revenue collection and
discouraging the practice of shifting cultivation. The forest reservation and anti-podu policies faced
strong opposition from the local tribals, which were suppressed or overcome in most areas.11
The alienation of communities from their habitat is intimately related to rights and access to
the forest resources they used, and can be traced back to faulty colonial understandings of land
ownership. Alien concepts of private property and a centralised land revenue system introduced
in the colonial era initiated a process of land titling, which resulted in alienation for two immediate
 Andhra Pradesh 105

reasons: (i) the diversion of uncultivated land for agriculture by migrant settlers, land deeds
(pattas) for which were subsequently issued to them by the Government, and (ii) the establishment
of the forest department leading to large tracts of forested (and non-forested) land coming under
control of the state. The extent of pre-independence alienation of tribal land in the state is difficult
to ascertain, except in cases of land regularisation where the revenue department and forest
department have measured losses in terms of the acreage of land lost.12
In 1932, when the forests may have been abundant and exploitation of timber was on a small
scale and that of NTFP negligible, a forest policy was formulated by the Government of Hyderabad
with the help of the then Inspector General of Forests of India, Mr. L. Mason. However, before
the recommendations could be implemented the Second World War began and forest areas which
were accessible were worked in advance to meet war needs. To rectify this over-exploitation, a
post-war forest policy was prepared but when this was about to be implemented Hyderabad state
was merged into the Indian Union and jagirs were abolished. As a result, large tracts of land were
transferred to the forest department.13

2.3 Post-independence governance

2.3.1 Pre-JFM era (1947-1992)
In the post-Independence era, colonial policies and attitudes of mistrust and neglect of the
tribals continued in AP, as in the rest of the country. The Panchayati Raj Act that was introduced
in the 1950s to decentralise and democratise governance has little in common with the traditional
institution of panchayats (village executive) and gram sabhas (village council) that were/are in
place in many parts of the country. The institutions established under this Act were multi-village,
bureaucratic and corrupt.14 Thus this Act failed to empower the local communities. There was also
little linking between Panchayati Raj institutions and those responsible for forest management.
With the introduction of the Jagir Abolition Regulation 1949, 21 Jagir forest blocks covering a
total area of 26,931 acres were claimed by the forest department of the Government of Hyderabad
between 1951 and 1952. As more forests were taken over, either by the Government or by other
settlers from outside, the rights of many tribal settlers were not legally recognised as many of them
had no land records or pattas and also practised shifting cultivation. The lands left fallow in the
shifting cultivation cycle were often taken over by outsiders or designated as forest land, and the
tribals who came back after the cycle to reclaim the fallow area were either unable to do so, or, if
they succeeded, were termed ‘encroachers’. Under severe political pressure, the State Government
was forced to regularise these ‘encroachments’ in 1972 and again in 1980. The settlement process
was itself flawed, unjust and corrupt, leading to hardship to many tribals whose rights were not
recognised, while many others got pattas on land not rightfully theirs.15 These regularizations led
to an increase in the trend of encroachment. Events leading to the second regularisation in 1980
are significant in that they included open instigation of tribals by ‘extremists’ to indulge in illicit
felling and encroachment into forests.
Meanwhile, the mandate of the forest department continued to be revenue generation rather
than ecological safeguarding or meeting the requirements of the local people. A report by the
National Commission on Agriculture in 1976 recommended clear-felling and establishment of
industrially valuable plantations in degraded or other natural forests, completely ignoring the heavy
dependence of local people on such forests and the impact of such a move on forest biodiversity.
This report also recommended encouragement of farm forestry on common and private lands to
meet industrial demand.16 The former recommendation laid the foundation for the establishment
state chapter - andhra pradesh

of the AP Forest Development Corporation (APFDC). Nearly 600,000 ha of state forest lands have
been leased out to the corporation for plantations.17
The Social Forestry Scheme (supported by the Canadian Funding Agency, CIDA) was perhaps
the first step towards any kind of state support for participatory management of natural resources
in AP. However, the programme was not very successful for three major reasons: (i) not enough
community lands were available for plantation; (ii) communities were distrustful of the government
and in many cases refused to participate for fear of their limited common lands being taken over
by the State; and (iii) benefits went mainly to big farmers.18 The programme did, however, provide
some space for positive action amongst some local communities, supporting NGOs and interested
government officials. The Social Forestry Programme stopped in 1993 with CIDA funding coming
to an end.19 Among the most well-known examples of community forestry efforts in AP are the
regeneration of degraded forests on Revenue Department hillocks in the drought-prone Anantpur
district, facilitated and promoted by the Anana Paryavaran Parirakshana (APP), an active NGO.
Local NGOs and communities in the Cuddappah district replicated this effort, supported by the
funding agencies OXFAM and AFPRO.
106 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The policy on NTFP is clearly reflected in the Government policy on bamboo. Forest-dependent
communities use bamboo extensively: bamboo basket-making itself is believed to generate partial
employment for about 23,000 people in the tribal areas. Yet areas rich in bamboo continue to be
preferentially allocated to industry20 while there are restrictions on the extraction of bamboo by
local communities. Forest-dependent communities, mainly tribal populations, consider the industry
responsible for degradation of forests and the extraction practices as unsustainable.

2.3.2. 1992 onwards – joint forest management and PESA

Andhra Pradesh adopted the 1990 central government Joint Forest Management Policy in 1992.
Under this scheme, degraded forest lands could be handed over for reforestation and regeneration
to local communities, with conditions relating to a share in the forest produce (including timber),
and the villages’ responsibilities towards conservation being specified from the start.
In 2000, a proposal was mooted by the government to hand over some degraded forests
including joint forest management areas to industry. The contention was that industry would
invest in these areas and share the benefits with the local people. The proposal met with massive
opposition from all sectors including community members, academics and activists who felt that
industry was too powerful a partner for local communities, and would gain more power over the
forests in the long term, which would adversely affect local communities. Some NGOs also saw
it as an effort to provide a direct entry point to industry in the forestry sector. Many believe that
participatory programmes like JFM do not require massive external investment. Much of these can
be generated locally, if funds already allocated for the area are utilized and dispersed among many
line agencies.21
The 73rd amendment of the Constitution and the Extension to Scheduled Areas Act was enacted
in 1996 by the Central Government, empowering village level institutions and conferring the rights
(and in the case of scheduled areas, the ownership) over NTFP and many other decision-making
powers to them. The Act has not yet been implemented in the state.22 The most valuable NTFP
continues to be extracted by contractors and/or government monopoly institutions such as the
Girijan Cooperative Corporation (GCC). Forest-dependent communities can collect nationalised
NTFP but cannot sell it in the open market. On the other hand not much attention has been paid
towards development, management and marketing of NTFP that is of lower commercial value but
meets most local livelihood needs.23

3. Origins of community conservation

Many communities have traditionally depended on the forest for various products. This
includes:
• Fruits such as sitaphal, jamun, jaam, danim, jeedi or bilawa.
• Non-timber forest products such as mahua (flower and seed of Madhuca indica for making
liquor and oil), thunki fruit and leaves, bel fruit, kaweet, thangedu and rela barks, and nuts like
chironji;
• Resins and gums such as gum karaya, nalla tumma and tella tumma;
• Honey and beeswax;
• Bamboo;
• Katha;
• Medicinal products such as visha mushti, chilla ginjalu, ashwagandha, harda;
• Paala kodish, a soft wood used in making delicate items such as combs and numerous other
materials such as rousa grass, basur grass, rope grass, fodder grass, jarob grass, kopir grass
and bodha grass which are used in making ropes, mats, brooms and other household items, as
well as some which are good fodder for cattle.
The strong dependence of the local people on these resources provides a powerful stake for
conservation, if appropriately channelled.
Documentation of resources being conserved and managed by local communities in the state is
scant. In the following sections, both traditional and newer initiatives at community conservation are
explored along resource-based divisions: (i) forest resources, (ii) mangroves, and (iv) heronries.
 Andhra Pradesh 107

3.1. Community conservation of forest resources

It is believed that the tribal-
and forest-dominated districts
of East and West Godavari,
Srikakulam, Vizianagaram,
Visakhapatnam, Nizamambad,
Khammam and Adilabad have
a rich tradition of systems and
practices of forest resource
management. Traditional
forest management systems
with clearly laid out rules for
extraction can still be observed
in villages like Oblapuram and
Velidelkala in Kareemnagar
district, and Yanampalli and
Sikendarapur in Nizamabad
district. There are examples of
sacred groves in many parts of
the state, such as in Warangal Women collecting seeds in the regenerated and protected forest of Indur,
district.24 Medak district, Andhra Pradesh Photo: Ashish Kothari

The much-talked-about JFM showcase of forest protection by the community at Behroonguda

village, the first VSS to be recognized by the Government, was actually an initiative begun by
villagers to overcome resource crunches25. However, according to Samata,26 an activist group
fighting for rights of tribals, fine examples of traditional forest management in Srikakulam district
collapsed after being included in the JFM Programme. A few villages in Adilabad district continue
to manage their resources and have reportedly rejected JFM outright.27
Communities in villages bordering Orissa, apparently influenced by the initiatives in Orissa (see
Orissa state chapter for details), began spontaneously protecting their surrounding forests.28 There
are several instances where villagers have started forest protection as a response to resource
scarcity or as a continuing traditional practice. Communities in Mantoor village, Medak district,
began protecting a revenue hillock in 1994 after failing to find enough wood to erect stalls for the
annual festival of the local deity. In 1997, after a protracted struggle, they stopped clear-felling
of the surrounding Reserve Forest by the APFDC, which had intended to carry out commercial
plantations in the degraded forests.29 It was only in 2000 that they were included in the JFM
programme.30 Subsequent to their struggle, an order was passed that makes consent of the
adjoining VSS(s) mandatory for APFDC before clear-felling is permitted in any forest.31
About 150 acres of degraded landscape around the Rishi Valley Education Centre in Rayalseema
has been regenerated by the combined efforts of local farmers, NGOs and the schoolchildren.32

3.2. Community conservation of mangroves

Andhra Pradesh has a coastline 996 km long, with some ecologically critical areas including the
coastal lagoon ecosystem of Pulicat Lake in the south and the mangrove ecosystems of Krishna
Delta (Nizampatnam and Machilipatnam), and Coringa in the Godavari estuary. Of the total forested
state chapter - andhra pradesh

area in the state, 582 sq km are mangroves.

Prawn seed collection from the wild has created large-scale ecological imbalance in the mangroves
of Andhra Pradesh. In 2001 a programme was initiated by the M.S. Swaminathan Research
Foundation (MSSRF), Chennai, for the regeneration of mangroves with people’s participation.
MSSRF adopted 10 villages in the East Godavari, Krishna and Guntur districts. Local communities
were encouraged to establish Ecodevelopment Committees to assist members raise
alternative fuel resources to reduce dependence on the mangroves. Resource
maps were prepared using satellite imagery.
With support from the forest department, this initiative has succeeded
in restoring 300ha of degraded mangroves in the three districts. Studies
conducted by the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI)
have clearly shown a considerable increase in fish catch in these areas.
Participating communities have so far earned Rs 51 lakhs from the various
schemes promoted by MSSRF.
108 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

There has also been an attempt to follow the JFM model and initiate joint mangrove management
(JMM). According to a MSSRF report33 ‘The Joint Mangrove management (JMM) model consists of
two aspects. The first involves mobilization of institutional organizations and mobilization of the
community towards mangrove management. It also involves village development through training
and capacity building and awareness. The second part involves technical support…JMM in this region
has resulted in the restoration of 515 hectares of degraded mangroves and brought over 9,442
hectares of verdant mangroves under the management of the village level JMM institutions.’

3.3. Community conservation of heronries

AP is known for its heronries, where a host of large waterbird species roost and breed on trees
around traditional tanks. There are three major factors that attract birds to these:
a) Feeding conditions: Aquatic birds depend on large wetlands and they need many wetlands,
distributed over a large area, a condition that decentralised village tanks ideally provide.
b) Availability of nesting sites, usually trees, to help avoid predation.
c) Safety (possibly the main factor).
In many instances the local villagers traditionally protect these sites. Heronries are to be found
in Vedurupattu in Nellore district, Uppalapadu in Guntur district and Nelapattu in Nellore district
among others (for details, see case studies). One of the well-known examples is that of Nelapattu.
The heronry here was declared a sanctuary under the Wildlife (Protection) Act in September 1997.
Unfortunately, due to this, local people’s access to the lake was restricted, leading to serious
conflicts between the sanctuary authorities (the forest department), and the local people who have
been protecting the birds for generations.34
It is interesting to note that birds from Neelapattu, Vedurupattu also feed on fish from Pulicat lake
(see the Tamil Nadu state chapter in this volume). Pulicat lake is also a CCA site, where fisherman
not only follow traditional fishing practices which ensure conservation but also vigorously fight
against pollution and development project-related impacts.

4.1. Opportunities and constraints for community conservation

The JFM process has taken some steps towards effective people’s participation and benefit
sharing in the state. Since 1992, 12 amendments have been made based on feedback from NGOs
and the JFM monitoring cell of the APFD. JFM is in fact now being seen as a means to resolve land
conflicts with tribals. In many cases encroached lands have been included under JFM, providing
a form of official sanction of tribal presence in these areas as long as it leads to conservation and
regeneration of forests, though it does not of course resolve the deeper problem of land rights for
the tribal community. The version of JFM popularly called ‘Chief Minister’s JFM’ started in 1996-97
receives funds from the state exchequer and supports about 35 per cent of all VSSs in the state.35
The then CM had three state-level meetings with the members of the VSSs. His interventions are
believed to have been very effective in creating instantaneous operational changes.36 According a
report,37 ‘The joint forest management (JFM) movement has been in operation in more than 62,000
villages. This has improved the biophysical condition of around 11.2 million hectares of degraded
forest and the socio-economic conditions of about 35,000 villages.’
In districts where a large number of VSSs exist and are either encouraged
by the local NGOs or the FD, VSSs have started forming federations at
the Forest Range level. These initiatives are still too new to comment on any
impacts. The monitoring mechanism to ascertain ecological regeneration, local
empowerment and transparent as well as efficient management of funds is not
clear at this stage.
Though there have been notable positive outcomes of JFM, the negative
consequences (e.g., undermining some self-generated forest conservation initiatives)
and weaknesses (continued lack of power-sharing with villagers, inequities in benefit-
sharing, etc.) are also important. The state government passed a Community Forest
Management (CFM) Resolution in 200238 that appears the same as the JFM resolution
in spirit and content. Although it aims at achieving greater empowerment of local
institutions, local NGOs do not feel that the new Resolution will substantially change
ground realities. Villagers continue to be largely unaware of the new resolution
or its operational impacts.39 There is also a lot of fear among tribals and tribal
 Andhra Pradesh 109

activists that CFM may be used to term tribals practising shifting cultivation as encroachers and
thus deny their rights.
Another programme aimed at decentralization of resource management is the ‘Janmabhoomi
Programme’ proposed by the Chief Minister. Under this programme, villagers can take up projects
and contribute free labour to the project through the local village institutions (gram sabhas).40
It is not clear whether this has had any positive outcome for conservation of ecosystems around
villages.

Much of the following text first appeared in the Andhra Pradesh section in Tejaswini Apte
and Neema Pathak, ‘International Community Forestry Networks in India’, (Bogor, Indonesia,
CIFOR, 2003). Despite many efforts we found it extremely difficult to update the information
contained in this chapter. At the same time we were not able to get much information on the
conservation efforts in marine areas or of mangroves. This limitation is regretted.

Endnotes
1
Joint forest management in Andhra Pradesh: Final Report (Hyderabad, AP NGOs Committee on JFM, 1998).
2
http://www.censusindia.net/t_00_003.html
3
http://www.censusindia.net/t_00_005.html
4
http://www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Religiondata_2001.xls. Note that most tribal communities seem to be
classified as Hindus, Muslims, or Christians, having been converted to these mainstream religions at various stages
of history.
5
Bharati and M. Patnaik, Joint Forest Management in Andhra Pradesh (Hyderabad, AP NGOs Committee on JFM,
1998).
6
The Naxalite movement is a leftist, armed movement, which started in protest against alienation of tribal land and
continues to be strongly anti-establishment in tribal dominated parts of the country.
7
The Qutub Shahi dynasty ruled Hyderabad till 1687. It was extinguished by Aurangzeb in 1687. One of the Mughal
nobles set himself up as an independant ruler of Hyderabad area. His title was Nizam-ul-Mulk and his successors were
popularly known as the Nizams of Hyderabad. Their dynasty was called the Asaf Jahi dynasty. They ruled Hyderabad
till 1948, when Indian forces took charge of the estate.
8
Sushruti Santhanam, ‘Report on the Study of Sustainable NTFP Collection’ (Pune, Kalpavriksh, Unpublished,
2000).
9
C.S. Rangachari and S.D. Mukherji, Old Roots, New Shoots: A Study of Joint Forest Management in Andhra Pradesh,
India (New Delhi, Winrock International and Ford Foundation, 2000).
10
A patta is a memorandum of the particulars of a holding and land assessment, given by the state to the landholder,
usually considered as constituting a title to the land. A pattadar is a holder of the patta.
11
N. Sundar, R. Jeffery and N. Thin, Branching Out: Joint Forest Management in India (New Delhi, Oxford University
Press, 2001).
12
Santhanam, ‘Report on the Study of Sustainable NTFP Collection’.
13
(As above).
14
R. Raina, ‘Study on Networks in Community Forestry in India’ (Bhopal, Indian Institute of Forest Management,
2002).
15
LAYA, Land Rights in Tribal Areas (1998).
state chapter - andhra pradesh

16
Raina, ‘Study on Networks’. (As above).
17
Personal communication with Satya Srinivas, co-convenor of AP NGOs Committee for JFM in Andhra Pradesh,
2002.
18
Rangachari and Mukherji, Old Roots, New Shoots. (As above).
19
Sundar et al., Branching Out. (As above).
20
Bharati and Patnaik, Joint Forest Management in Andhra Pradesh. (As above).
21
R. Mahapatra, ‘Seeking Reliance’, Down To Earth, 15 September 2000; Personal communication with members of
AP NGOs Committee for JFM in Andhra Pradesh, 2002; Personal communication with S.K. Chhottray, Conservator of
Forests, Khammam, 2002.
22
Santhanam, ‘Report on the Study of Sustainable NTFP Collection’. (As above).
23
(As above).
24
Personal communication with Surendra Pandey, Conservator of Forests, Nizamabad, 2002.
110 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory
25
E. D’Silva and B. Nagnath, ‘Behroonguda: A Rare Success Story in Joint Forest Management’, Economic and
Political Weekly, 9 February 2002.
26
Anon. Joint Forest Management: A Critique Based on People’s Perceptions (Hyderabad, Samata, 2001).
27
Personal communication with Madhoo, Anthra, Andhra Pradesh, 2002.
28
Personal communication with Madhoo, Anthra, Andhra Pradesh, 2002; Personal communication with Bhanumathi,
Samata, Andhra Pradesh, 2002.
29
There are similar experiences in Karnataka where villagers opposed monoculture plantations proposed by the
government under various schemes.
30
Personal communication with Satya Srinivas, co-convenor of APNGOs Committee for JFM in Andhra Pradesh,
2002.
31
Personal communication with V.R. Sowmitri, Co-convenor of APNGOs Committee for JFM in Andhra Pradesh,
2002.
32
S. Rangaswami, ‘Rishi Valley Experiment’, Hindu Folio, September 1998.
33
T. Ravishankar, R. Ramasubramanian and N. Sreenivasa Rao, Intersectoral Linkages for Conservation and
Management of Forest Resources – A Case Study on Mangroves of India (Kakinada, M.S. Swaminathan Research
Foundation, undated).
34
Personal communication with Satya Srinivas, co-convenor of APNGOs Committee for JFM in Andhra Pradesh,
2002.
35
Bharati and Patnaik, Joint Forest Management in Andhra Pradesh. (As above).
36
Personal communications with V.R. Sowmitri, co-convenor, APNGOs Committee for JFM in Andhra Pradesh, 2002.
37
Ravishankar et al., Intersectoral Linkages. (As above).
38
G.O. Ms. No. 13, EFES&T (for III) Dept., dated 12.02.2002
39
Personal communication with villagers of village Eliminadu in Ranga Reddy district, 2002.
40
Sundar et al., Branching Out. (As above).
 CCA/Andhra/CS1/Adilabad/Behroonguda/Forest protection

Behroonguda village, Adilabad

Background
This case study gives an insight into the various challenges faced by a village while protecting
500 ha of degraded forest, and whose efforts have emerged as the benchmark in joint forest
management in Andhra Pradesh.
The forests of Behroonguda in Adilabad district are dominated by teak with teak forming 59
per cent of the trees present here. Some other species include neem, usirr or amla, mahua and
bamboo.
The inhabitants of Behroonguda were originally from a village called Tanimadgu, from where
they were evicted in 1945, when the Kadam dam was built. Subsequently, the victims of an
extensive fire in Utkoor village have also settled in Behroonguda. These villagers mainly belong to
the gond and naikpod tribes. In 1990, the village had 97 households, out of which 57 belonged to
gonds and the remaining 40 belonged to naikpods (also closely related to the gond community).
The gonds possess a rich tradition of participation in secular and religious village affairs. The
villagers have an obligation to attend all the village meetings and cooperate with the headman
while implementing the decisions of the village council. Besides, the villagers also contribute in
kind appropriate quantities of foodstuff that are required as religious offerings.

Towards community conservation

The area of Behroonguda was cleared of its forests mainly due to the resettlement of the gonds
and naikpods. In 1990, the villagers began to feel the depletion of forest resources around them.
There was no timber and no firewood that could be consumed by the villagers in the forest and
thus their livelihoods were threatened. The villagers came to the conclusion that the remaining
forest area needed to be protected in order to achieve a sustainable livelihood. Subsequently the
villagers decided to take necessary steps to rejuvenate the natural resource around them. They
organized themselves into a village forest protection committee (FPC). This posed a threat to the
timber thieves from the neighbouring villages. The members of the VFPC had physical clashes
with the timber smugglers, in which one of the villagers was fatally injured. In course of time they
were able to establish their dominance and spread the message that their forests were now being
protected from the plunderers.
In 1993, the forest department approached the village and the village was included in the
state forest department’s joint forest management (JFM) Programme. At that time the FPC was
headed by a woman president named Gouribai and comprised 50 per cent women representatives.
Behroonguda Forest Protection Committee became the first in the state to gain official recognition.
A micro-plan was drawn up with the participation of almost the entire village, along with two NGOs
and the forest staff.
The FPC made it mandatory for everyone in the village to patrol the forest area; failure to do so
case studies - andhra pradesh

resulted in a penalty of Rs 100 to be paid by the offender. Anyone who missed patrolling more than
thrice was removed from the VSS.
The forest department has signed a MoU with the villagers and the FPC members have been issued
identity cards with their photographs that give them the authority to take corrective measures
against timber thieves and other encroachers of the forest.
The meetings of the executive council of the village are held at least once a month and sometimes
more often if required. The minutes of the meetings, the details of the decisions taken and a record
of those who attended the meetings are regularly maintained.
The women are equal stakeholders in the conservation efforts, as a majority of the wage labourers
in employment generated under JFM are women. The Behroonguda FPC had a woman president for
a period of five years. A random survey has shown that the women are well aware of the objectives
of setting up a forest protection committee and the financial dealings of the FPC.

111
112 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Through the interactions with the villagers it is clear that the prime interest of the FPC is not
based on the economic benefits acquired from the forest resources. The goal of the FPC is, as
stated by the head of the panchayat, to equate the health and well-being of the forests with the
wealth of the village—a gond perspective on life. These sentiments are clearly reflected in the
FPC’s decision to harvest only 30 trees in the first thinning exercise, whereas the silviculturalists
had prescribed the removal of 173 trees from the forest. This suggestion would definitely have a
positive impact on the quality of teak in these forests, although the action of the FPC is better for
the forests from an ecological point of view. Besides, the villagers use the other forest produce and
any step towards the creation of a teak monoculture will not be conducive to them. To adhere to
this purpose the FD has planted other local species in the degraded forest patches.
The villagers’ far-sightedness towards conservation efforts is clearly reflected in a decision taken
by them in June 1998, to deposit their earnings of a sum Rs 4,00,000 derived from the first sale of
timber poles, firewood, and grass into a five-year bank deposit rather than distributing it amongst
the VSS members. The VSS was guided primarily by the concern for future generations to follow
certain guidelines that would provide sufficient incomes for conservation in future.

Impacts of community conservation

After the community was organised, and with the support of the government, a number of
activities were taken up by the villagers. Some of these activities and associated impacts are:
Soil and moisture conservation
1. Supported by the JFM programme, the villagers constructed a number of bunds across streams
and excavated percolation tanks for soil and moisture conservation. Villagers reported a marked
increase in the water level in the first year itself, offering better prospects for growing vegetables
for the first time in this otherwise drought-prone area.
Social and economic impacts
1. Seasonal migration to nearby towns and villages in search of employment, especially from
March to May, was a common feature in the village. The forest department introduced daily-
wage employment opportunities to the villagers in silvicultural operations, soil and moisture
conservation, and other support activities. Since the villagers could find a source of income
generation in their own village, the trend of migration was eventually reversed.
2. The distribution of subsidized smokeless chullahs to half the households has cut the firewood
needs of the village by 25 per cent. Some families have even started using biogas for cooking
purposes.
3. Effective forest protection offered by the VSS has resulted in the re-emergence of non-timber
forest produce (NTFP)1 like mahua and bamboo in the forest. It has been estimated that after
this commencement of regeneration the villagers have been extracting NTFP worth Rs 1,45,000
per annum for personal consumption.
4. Silvicultural operations in the forest have resulted in adequate timber to meet the needs of all
the villagers. There is a surplus of timber that is eventually put up for sale in the market after
all the local needs are met.2
5. In June 1998, the total cost of protecting and managing the Behroonguda forest worked out to
Rs 2,48,290. However the total benefit received by the local community was about Rs 6,36,432.
This indicated a benefit-cost ratio of 2.5:1. Out of this amount, Rs 3, 59,500 was directed to
the usufruct benefits of the villagers. Even after deduction of this amount from the total benefit,
the profit exceeds the cost of protection. It is interesting to note that 31 per cent of the cost of
protection is contributed by the community, mainly through voluntary patrolling of forests.
Ecological impact
1. The forest protection has resulted in a marked increase in the biological diversity of the forest,
including improved production of NTFP.
2. For a good growth of teak in the natural forest, silviculturists had recommended a 20 per cent
removal after the first six years of protection and 15 per cent of the remainder after 15 years.
This would mean extraction of 173 trees after 6 years. However, the VSS decided to extract
only 30 trees. While less than optimum extraction might reduce the commercial value of teak,
it will not do any ecological damage to the forest.
 Andhra Pradesh 113

3. The Jannaram Forest Division has undertaken participatory research in the Behroonguda forests.
The forest staff and the local people have created research plots in the forests to monitor the
impacts of silvicultural interventions and the local harvests on the growth of forest. The results
show a good regeneration and a good quality of forest.
Behroonguda has now become a source of inspiration for the surrounding villages. In 1998,
one of the neighbouring villages, Chintapally, inspired by Behroonguda, came together to form
a VSS and petitioned the forest department for recognition. The committee members invited the
president of the Behroonguda FPC to conduct meetings and maintain accounts for them in the
initial stages.

Opportunities and constraints3

One of the major drawbacks in this conservation effort is that the forest department has not given
a clear picture to the people about the period for which assistance in the technical and financial
aspects will be provided. Another unresolved issue with JFM in Andhra Pradesh is the ambiguity on
the issue of the final harvest, as to whether it will or will not take place.

Conclusion
There are a number of reasons for the success of Behroonguda. The gond community has a
high sense of social organization. In addition, like the other efforts of this kind, local leadership
has played a very important and inspirational role in the success of the conservation efforts in
Behroonguda.
The forest department has also reciprocated by allocating one forest guard and forester working
exclusively to provide help to the Behroonguda villagers in protecting and managing their 500 ha
of forest.
The motto that has kept the village going has been:
Dille tha sarkar manga vanya, Keda ayo vada-kedathe pandtha
Pandi na palun make mandaana, Mava nathe mava sarkar
(The government in Delhi should come to our doorstep, the forest should become our backyard.
The fruits of the forest should be ours, our government should be in our village).

All information has been extracted from E. D’Silva and B. Nagnath, ‘Local people managing
local forests: Behroonguda shows the way in Andhra Pradesh, India’, Report prepared with help
from Asia Forestry Network (1999).

For more information contact:

K. Bhanumathi
Director, Samatha
Plot 154, Sector - V,
Visalakshi Nagar,
Visakhapatnam - 530043
case studies - andhra pradesh

Email: samatha@satyam.net
Ph: 0891-2737662

Endnotes
1
Income from sale of NTFP and wages from forest work together constituted 43 per cent of the total family income
in 1998.
2
In 1998 itself, the villagers received Rs 3,59,500 from the sale of 3,198 teak poles thinned from 100 hectares as
part of silvicultural oprerations.
3
Editor’s note: It is not clear from the available information what is the faunal diversity in the area and how it has
been impacted by the village initiative.
 CCA/Andhra/CS2/Anantapur/Kalpavalli/Forest protection

Kalpavalli forests, Anantapur

Background
Timbaktu Collective is an organisation based in Anantpur district of Andhra Pradesh. The
collective has been working on ecological restoration, natural resource management, women’s
empowerment, alternative education, etc. The natural resource management project of the
Collective has been concentrating on 8 villages of CK Palli and Roddam mandals since early 1990s.
The overall objective of this project is to help the villagers protect and conserve their natural and
common property resources so as to improve their livelihood conditions. One of the villages where
this work began is Mushtikovila.

Towards community conservation

The Collective started mobilisation of this village through regular conversations in 1992. In 1993
the villagers agreed to regenerate 150 acres of their waste common lands. By 2004, eight villages
in the area had started regenerating forests in their vicinity with the help of newly established
village level forest protection committees (FPCs). The eight villages have also established a
federation called Kalpavalli Adavi Samakya, which is protecting and helping regenerate 8,500
acres of contiguous forests. The Samakya has 1320 members in the general body.
The individual FPCs undertake activities like fire control, seed dibbling, soil and water conservation
works, etc., with the help of the Collective. They have also appointed forest watchers for regular
patrolling in the forest. The other activities of the FPCs include monitoring the forest watchers,
planning activities to be undertaken in the protected forests, decisions related to the tamarind
orchards (these orchards have been established on 273 acres in 9 villages with support from
the district administration and the Collective), collection of fines from those cutting trees, sale of
date-palm fronds and operating their respective bank accounts. All the FPCs meet regularly and
participate in the federation meetings.
In the year 2003-4 there was a plan to construct windmills in this area. The federation wrote
letters to the collector requesting him to not construct these mills in the area falling under the
protected forests of villages Kogira, Kambalapalli, and Shyapuram.
Given the acute shortage of grass in this area, the Collective organised a number of awareness
programmes about the need and ways of conserving grass and preventing fires.

Impacts of community action

Grass is one of the most important needs of this very dry and drought prone area. 2003-4, was
the fourth successive year of drought. Yet Kalpavalli continued to produce grass. 3,222 farmers
from 109 villages cut and took 6,948 cart-loads of grass worth Rs 27,79,200 and generating 55,584
workdays. Besides this, 1500 cattle and 5000 goat and sheep were brought here for grazing.
case studies - andhra pradesh

The date-palm tree has regenerated profusely along the main stream in the Kalpavalli forests.
These trees are of great support to the poor in this area, particularly during droughts. The FPCs
have been reaping benefits from the sale of date-palm fronds to basket- and mat-makers and as
fees from the toddy-tappers. The poorest sections of the population here have been benefiting
from collection and sale of dates in the local markets in summer. It is estimated that 54 people
earned about Rs 79,828 from the sale of dates during May 2003.

All information has been extracted from the annual report (2003-2004) of the Timbaktu
Collective, titled ‘In Celebration of Life’.

114
 Andhra Pradesh 115

For more information contact:

Timbaktu Collective,
C.K. Palli Village, Anantpur district,
Andhra Pradesh, India 515101
Ph: 08559-240335, 240149, 240337
E-mail: timbaktu@vsnl.com; Website: www.timbaktu.org

case studies - andhra pradesh

 CCA/Andhra/CS3/Anantapur/Veerapuram/Heronry

Veerapuram village, Anantapur

Background
The villagers have taken effective action towards conservation in Veerapuram village. This village
is situated in the Chilamathur Mandal of Anantapur district in Andhra Pradesh. The village is located
at a distance of about 100 km from Bangalore. This area receives an average annual rainfall of
about 600 mm and the temperature varies from 180C to 400C during the year.
Most of the forests are widely scattered and a majority of them are dry deciduous or open scrub.
The flora includes tellatumma, sundra, pedda manu, narlingi, yapa, yon, sopera, rohi, etc., with
common weeds like lantana and korintha. The major fauna of the region includes the leopard,
jungle cat, wolf, jackal, sloth bear, four-horned antelope, chital, Indian wild boar, chinkara, etc.
The common avifauna found here includes bulbuls, parakeets, Indian peafowl, snipes, teals,
woodpeckers, etc., along with migratory waterfowl like Northern pintail, black ibis, glossy ibis,
black-headed ibis, spotbill duck, painted stork, pelicans, etc.
The village consists of 150 households with a total population of about 600. The dominant
community residing here is the Kapu (Reddy) community, whose main occupation is agriculture and
sericulture. The common crops grown are paddy, bajra and groundnut. Borewells and traditional
irrigation tanks are used as the major sources of irrigation in the village.
There are dozens of small and medium tanks within a 5-km radius of the village, of which
Veerapuram tank is one. This tank has a water-spread area of about 30 acres, with agricultural
dry lands on one side and a couple of hillocks on the other, which form the catchment of this tank.
These tanks are a major source of food for many resident and migratory birds in this area.

Towards community conservation

Some of the avian visitors such as the painted storks, pelicans and white ibises have been
nesting in the village since time immemorial. The villagers perceive the arrival of painted storks
as a good omen and offer protection to them. A few storks arrive during the months of December-
January to scout the area and are followed within a few days by thousands of them (about 5000
this year). A couple of days after their arrival in the village, the birds start building their nests on
the trees within the village. The village has about 20 tree species, including chinta, nallatumma,
sarkaritumma, rai and ganuga, with a sparse canopy, on which their nests are built. Grey herons
also nest on the same trees, whereas white ibises only roost on them during the night.

Opportunities and constraints

In 2002, the highest number of painted storks (about 5000) came for breeding purposes to
the lake. Two pelicans had also arrived then but they did not nest in the village. According to the
villagers, during the last 10 years pelicans have stopped nesting in the village: they arrive at the
case studies - andhra pradesh

beginning of the season (December-January), survey the place but do not breed. White ibises
roost on the same trees during the night but they are not seen breeding in the vicinity.
Although the birds do not face any kind of threats from the host village, there are other threats
faced by them:
• Due to heavy rains in the monsoons some of the chicks fall out of their nests.
• Indiscriminate hunting near Karnataka border, which is only 2 km away from the village, is a
major cause for concern. In 2001-2, about 100 chicks starved to death as their parent birds did
not return to the nests, probably killed by the poachers.
• There is a lack of nesting space as the old trees are dying.
• Large-scale fishing in the tanks in the vicinity is depriving the birds of stable feeding grounds.
• The tamarind trees in the village where the storks build their nests are being auctioned by the
116
 Andhra Pradesh 117

panchayat for fruit, and while harvesting the bidders cause disturbance to the birds.
• Heavy silting of the feeding tanks has resulted in less water storage, and the tank dries up before
the breeding season ends.
• Some of the trees on which the birds build their nests are in private lands. The villagers have so
far been able to convince the owners not to cut the trees despite their need; however, they feel
that this is only a short-term solution.
However, the villagers’ efforts towards protection of birds have been recognized by a number of
NGOs who have come forward to help the villagers. An NGO called PFA (People for Animals) from
Bangalore is involved in nurturing the injured or orphaned chicks in a small temporary enclosure.
An individual based in Puttaparthi in Anantapur district is also extending support to the young
ones for their rehabilitation. Another NGO called Chaitanya, based in Lepakshi, offered a few
thousand seedlings of tilapia fish to be released in Veerapuram tank during the last season as
part of improving their feeding grounds. The Institute of Bird Studies and Natural History of Rishi
Valley in Andhra Pradesh along with their staff and Mr. Ashish Pittie from Birdwatchers’ Society of
Andhra Pradesh planted five saplings in the village. They also facilitated villagers coming together
and taking an oath for the conservation of the birds.
The Andhra Pradesh Government has initiated work for eco-tourism. The villagers, especially the
youth, are enthusiastic and committed to conserving the birds. Six people from Kokkere Bellur (in
Karnataka), another successful community-conserved heronry, visited Veerapuram last year and
suggested to the local villagers that they could use the large quantity of bird droppings lying under
the trees as manure for their agricultural lands. However, the villagers did not do this as they feel
that scraping off the waste from under the trees might expose the roots and ultimately result in
the death of the trees. Villagers are currently considering setting up a rehabilitation center for the
rescued birds in an old community building in the village.
The villagers have resolved to seal off the sluice gate of the tank for the last seven years to make
fish available to the birds during the season. They also opined that auctioning of tanks for fishing
should be banned in the entire revenue village for this purpose.

Recommendations
Short Term Activities:
• Supply of fast-growing saplings for plantation within the village. Locals preferred banyan and
pipal trees.
• Incentives/rewards for encouraging the efforts of the villagers in conservation.
• Education to the villagers on rehabilitation of injured chicks that fall out of their nests.
• Audio-visual education on conservation for the children of the village.
• Supply of fish seedlings for release in tanks around the village.
Long Term Activities:
• Take effective measures for desilting the tanks for increased storage of water.
• Improve the feeding grounds by releasing seedlings of tilapia fish.
• Work with the forest department of Gudibanda Division of Karnataka to take effective steps to
check hunting of storks and other birds in the tanks around Veerapuram on their side.
• Closely monitor the impacts of the proposed eco-tourism on the health of the heronry.
case studies - andhra pradesh

• Conduct exposure visits to other community-conserved heronries like Kokkrebelur in Karnataka

and Pedullapalle in AP.
• Organise the villagers into a group and get it registered.
• Promote income generation through eco-tourism in order to raise funds for basic maintenance of
the rehabilitation center.
• Explore the possibility of forming a Tree Growers’ Co-operative Society of Veerapuram for
regeneration of the hillock that forms the catchment of the Veerapuram tank, in order to reduce
the siltation (soil run-off) into the tank.

Conclusion
Unlike Nellapatu (see the case study for details), the enthusiasm among the villagers for
conservation of this heronry is still very high. The conservation lies in the hands of people with
118 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

a strong sense of ownership. The conservation efforts in this heronry can be further beneficial
through implementing programmes designed with the people.

This case study was contributed by Suresh Jones and Dr. Subba Rao, Foundation for Ecological
Security, Andhra Pradesh, in July 2002.

For more information contact:

Team Leader
Foundation for Ecological Society
AP Project
17-89-1, NVR Layout, Gandhi Road
Mandanapalle - 517325
Chittoor district
Andhra Pradesh
E-mail: madanapalle.fes@ecologicalsecurity.org
 CCA/Andhra/CS4/Cuddappah/Pedullapalle/Heronry

Pedullapalle village, Cuddappah

Background
Pedullapalle village is located in B. Kodur Mandal of Cuddappah district of Andhra Pradesh. The
forest type is mixed deciduous and the vegetation includes red sandalwood (endemic), axlewood,
East Indian satinwood, anjana, shisum, white gulmohar, etc. The river Pennar flows about 40
kilometres south from this village where the Lankamala ranges meet the Palakonda- Seshachalam
ranges of the Eastern Ghats. This place receives an annual rainfall of 600 mm and the temperature
in the summer months shoots up to an oppressive 45°C.
There are diverse fauna species such as macaques, Hanuman langurs, sloth bears, leopards,
jungle cats, wild boar, sambar, spotted deer, blackbucks and even an occasional tiger. The Jerdon’s
courser that was thought to be extinct was rediscovered in this area, subsequent to which the
Lankamalleswara Wildlife Sanctuary was declared as a measure for its protection. The avifauna of
this area includes partridges, quails, grey junglefowl, Indian peafowl and migratory waterfowl like
snipes, teals, northern pintails, spotbill ducks, Northern shovellers, garganeys, etc.

Towards community conservation

Although the village is surrounded by wildlife as mentioned above the actual protection efforts have
been focused within the village. Peddulapalle village is situated 34 km north of Lankamalleswara
Wildlife Sanctuary. While villagers protect the birds and do not harm the roosting sites (as they
believe the birds bring good rains), they do not have any existing system of wildlife protection
outside the village.
This village has played host to a number of avian visitors such as painted storks, black-headed
ibis, Indian coromorants and great coromorants in the trees of the village for over a century.
These birds arrive here during the months of November-December. The communities have made
successful protection efforts for these birds for generations, as they believe that they are harbingers
of prosperity and a good agricultural yield.
Immature storks and white ibises are often seen resting on haystacks and rooftops of the village
during the nesting period. According to the villagers, earlier a large number of pelicans, storks
and ibises were also nesting in the village but they have stopped visiting this area since 1998 for
reasons unknown. Other local birds like egrets and heronsare spotted building their nests, placed
under those of storks and getting their food supply from the fish that drop from the upper tier.
The major feeding ground for these birds is the Badvel tank that is located around 3 km from
the village. This tank is fed by the Sagileru and Vankamarri reservoirs. Though fish form a major
part of the diet of these birds, they have also been observed feeding crustaceans and molluscs to
their young ones.
case studies - andhra pradesh

Opportunities and constraints

The villagers have observed a decreasing number of the avian visitors that come to the village for
breeding and nesting purposes. The villagers attribute this decrease due to lack of nesting space
for these birds. At present there are 23 tree species, including tamarind, Delonix elata, karanj,
banyan and shirish, placed in the heart of the village. Although there are many trees around the
village, the birds seem to prefer nesting in the heart of the village itself.
Some of the threats to the birds are:
1. During the time of the north-east monsoon, particularly during heavy rains, many young ones
fall from their nests, and despite various attempts made by the villagers to save them, very few
of them survive.
2. The local Yerikala tribe hunts the birds with nets and guns at the Badvel tank and occasionally
even try to poach the birds in the village. However they have been driven away by the villagers
several times.
119
120 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

3. Pisciculture is being encouraged by the Government as a means of revenue generation from

auctioning the tanks, and this seems to pose a threat to the birds due to lack of food required
for breeding.
4. There is a lack of nesting space for the birds on the trees in the village. This is because the birds
occupy most of the big trees in the village, and once the birds roost the tree canopy reduces due
to the guano/bird excreta, the acidic content of which reduces the canopy cover. Local people
informed that the number of trees has also reduced in the last few years.

This case study has been contributed by Suresh Jones and Dr Subba Rao, Foundation for
Ecological Security, Andhra Pradesh in July 2002.

For more information contact:

Team Leader,
Foundation for Ecological Security
AP Project
17-89-1, NVR Layout, Gandhi Road
Madanapalle - 517325
Chittoor district
Andhra Pradesh
E-mail: madanapalle.fes@ecologicalsecurity.org
 CCA/Andhra/CS5/Guntur/Uppalapadu/Bird protection

Uppalapadu freshwater lake, Guntur

The Uppalapadu-fresh water lake is located in
Pedakakani Mandal of Guntur district of Andhra Pradesh.
This lake is spread over an area of about 5 acres and is a
breeding ground for about 50 local and intercontinental
migratory bird species that have been visiting the lake
throughout the calendar year for generations. This is not
a legally protected area but the local villagers and gram
panchayat take conscious efforts to offer protection to
these avian visitors. In the year 2001, the lake was a
nesting spot for around 1550 birds of diverse species,
such as painted storks and adjutant storks, Asian open-
billed storks and black-headed ibis. As per a report in
January 2007, on an average over 3,500 pelicans and
a similar number of painted storks visit this densely Heronry at Uppalapadu Photo: Wild Orissa
populated sanctuary. ‘The number of Siberian migratory birds is also high and they have arrived
one month ahead of the regular schedule this year,’ points out Nageswara Rao, caretaker of the
area.
The number of birds inhabiting this small stretch of land/water also makes it an area with one
of the densest populations of migratory birds at any given time anywhere in India—the number of
birds could range between 3,000 and 12,000. Ibises, which arrive around June and leave within
three months, choose to breed here. Pelicans also breed here: while some of their eggs hatch,
some fall in the water. But no one goes near to rescue them as they get frightened and abandon
the nesting site. About 6,500 locals surrounding the lake take care of the birds that accidentally
fall in the village outside the water. The caretakers rush the injured ones to the local veterinarian
and later release them back into the flock.

Adapted from Susarla Ramesh, The Hindu, Friday, 29 December 2007.

For more information please contact:

Sri Mrutumjaya Rao,
District Wildlife Warden (Honorary), Guntur district
Andhra Pradesh
E-mail: vbramanamurthy@yahoo.com case studies - andhra pradesh

121
 CCA/Andhra/CS6/Medak/Mantoor village/Joint forest management

Mantoor village, Medak

Background
Mantoor village is situated in the Kowdipally Mandal in Medak district, of Andhra Pradesh, at
a distance of 65-70 kilometers from the state capital, Hyderabad. The forests consist of teak,
tellamaddi, billagodisa, gotti, bitluga, palaguidisa, sandra, pedda manu and nallamanu.
The village comprises 130 households with their main occupations being agriculture, livestock
and agricultural labour. They utilize the forests resources for their regular requirements. Most
of the villagers belong to the officially designated backward classes, including the mutraj, gaud,
yadav, pichakutta, wadla, and carpenter communities and 11 households of scheduled castes.
There are 8-9 landless households in the village, which depend on daily wages for subsistence. The
smallest landholding owned by the villager is half an acre and the largest is 9 acres. Many youth
migrate to nearby towns and cities in search of employment, while most others are unoccupied
throughout the year. Their educational qualifications are around secondary school level. They are
neither inclined towards village-based agricultural activities nor they are qualified enough to gain
employment in the cities.
The important crops cultivated by the villagers include groundnut, paddy and sugarcane. Villagers
mainly depend on the forest mainly for firewood and grass. Some knowledgeable individuals also
depend on the forest for medicinal plants. There is not much NTFP in the forest except for some
tendu trees, but the Mantoor villagers do not collect the leaves. Sometimes these leaves are
collected by people from other nearby villages.

Towards community conservation

In the early 1970s due to failure of the monsoons for three consecutive years this area faced
a severe drought. Because of this the villagers started depending on the surrounding forests for
their major source of income. They sustained themselves through this period by tapping gum
from the Tapasi Gum Tree. The villagers began to protect the trees by sleeping under them,
since the demand for gum was high and the trees were few and therefore under threat. This
practice continued for three years until the monsoons regularized in the village, finally diverting
the villager’s attention towards agriculture.
Neglect of the forest due to presence of the People’s War Group, unregulated resource use by
the locals and neighbouring villages, presence of migratory graziers and increase in agriculture
reduced people’s involvement in forest protection and resulted in its fast degradation.
In 1994, the people of Mantoor got together and decided to regenerate one of the adjoining
revenue hillocks where vegetation had been reduced to a few shrubs. The event that triggered this
initiative was when the villagers could not find enough wood to even erect stalls for the preparation
of the annual festival of the local deity inhabiting the hillock. The temporary solution was to bring
one pole from each household in the village to perform the ceremony. However, this experience
shocked the villagers and in the very next village meeting they took stock of the rapidly degrading
case studies - andhra pradesh

natural resources around them. A unanimous decision was taken to strictly protect the 60-acre
hillock, which they also realized was once a sacred grove.
The villagers decided to impose a fine of Rs 500 on anyone who extracted resources from
the prohibited area. A village committee was formed to monitor and control the issues of this
sacred grove. Through this practice the hillock started steadily regenerating, giving the villagers
tremendous encouragement.
In mid-1999, the Andhra Pradesh Forest Development (FD) allotted 60,000 acres of state-owned
Reserved Forest to the Andhra Pradesh Forest Development Corporation (APFDC).1 Mantoor village
was adjacent to part of these leased-out forests. The APFDC started commercial monocultures.
Mechanized techniques were adopted to uproot existing root stock to be replaced with eucalyptus
plants. The villagers opposed this action of APFDC, foreseeing the consequences, such as depletion
of the groundwater table due to monoculture plantations and severe shortage of firewood and
grass.
122
 Andhra Pradesh 123

The villagers had not been informed about the lease given to the APFDC or the future activities
planned. The villagers’ contention was that instead of leasing out the forest to the APFDC, the
government should hand it over to the villagers for management. Encouraged by the impacts of their
efforts at conservation on the hillock, they were confident that they could take on the responsibility
of managing the Reserve Forest falling within their boundaries as well. They demanded that they
should be included in the joint forest management (JFM) scheme of the government. A struggle
that followed resulted in some villagers being kept in police custody, which invoked a debate in
the meeting of the van suraksha samitis (VSS) of the neighboring area. The Andhra Pradesh NGOs
network on JFM took up the issue and held a joint meeting with the villagers of Mantoor, the VSS
members and the district NGO network. All the major newspapers and television channels covered
the story of the village struggle. Subsequent to this publicity, the lease to APFDC was cancelled
and the forests were decided to be jointly managed by the FD and the villagers under JFM.
A VSS was formed for the management of the forests and the meetings of the executive of
the VSS are now held every month with minimal women’s participation. All the members of the
executive and concerned officials are intimated about this meeting. The minutes of all the meetings
are recorded by the villagers.
The general body of the VSS includes one male and one female member from each household,
which means a total membership of 256. The general body meetings are held once in three
months.
So far the VSS has not explored or received any external sources of funding for its operations.
Most of their expenses are met from the compound fee collected from the offenders against the
forest rules and contributions from all members of the VSS general body (Rs 10 per person as and
when needed). They received a small financial grant from the FD in 2000-1 for the desilting of
water conservation tanks in and around the forests, which they successfully completed.
The villagers feel that they do not need large sums of money for carrying on with the VSS work
as they can generate funds from within the community through personal contributions, compound
fee, etc. However, they stressed that at critical and crucial times, when the community is in an
urgent need for funds and they are unable to generate them internally, there should be a provision
for funds during such times. The chairperson is not paid any remuneration for his services nor
provided any reimbursement for the expenses incurred by him. He invests his time and energy in
the VSS work purely out of commitment.
The VSS has taken up a number of steps to control and regulate forest resource use. These
include:
1. The VSS has appointed forest guards to patrol the forests regularly. The forest guards are paid
Rs 500 per month. Apart from this the villagers keep a vigil on the forest as and when they are
in the forest. Forest watchers are especially appointed in the period between July and October.
According to the villagers, this is the timber-felling season, as it is believed that timber felled in
this season is not affected by pests.
2. The villagers have installed 30 gobar gas plants in the village in last two years. Many villagers
also have an LPG connection. Before the conservation efforts started in the village, headloads
were extracted from the forest for sale. But as of now only poor families and those who do not
have biogas are allowed to collect headloads from the forest for personal consumption only.
3. Villagers have also restricted the use of forests by outsiders. A few villagers were concerned
about those poor people who were earlier dependent on these forests for biomass needs and
said they were unaware of how they were meeting their needs currently, while others felt that
case studies - andhra pradesh

protection activities have had little impact on the outside communities. A much more detailed
study of the area and the initiative is needed to understand the social implications of the
conservation efforts on the villagers.
4. For personal use, people are also allowed to extract certain species for fuelwood. While earlier
there were about four villages dependent on the resources of Mantoor forests, now only the
villagers of Mantoor extract resources from the forest.

Impacts of community effort

The villagers have benefited after the introduction in the following ways:
1. A greater sense of empowerment and stronger association with forests.
2. Regular availability of daily wage labour from forestry works.
124 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

3. Under JFM the FD has asked the villagers to carry out thinning of vegetation. The wood that is
collected is then auctioned by the villagers and the revenue obtained from it goes to the VSS
account.
4. After ten years compartment wise felling may begin. Villagers were not very clear about the
benefit sharing arrangement under JFM in the long run. However, they felt that such extractions
should be carried out in a regulated manner not harming the forests. It appeared to us that the
major benefit that the villagers saw from this program is not how much money will they be able
to generate eventually but the fact that the forests were under their control and management.
Also the facts, concerns and decisions made by the villagers about their forests mattered and
was taken into account.
5. The use of biogas, and regulated internal and external use of forest has reduced dependency on
the forest resources.
Presently the villagers are receiving some logistical help from an NGO called CARPAD. CARPAD
has been focusing on local empowerment and resource management. With the NGO’s help a few
self-help groups have been formed in the village.

Opportunities and constraints

There are many issues related to forest management that the VSS still has not been able to
resolve. These include the unabated grazing in the forest area by livestock such as goats and cattle
from within the village and outside the village. The attempts to prevent the goat owners from
outside villages have been futile.
The women’s participation in decision-making for conservation activities is extremely poor.
Although the village has formed a woman’s group (mahila mandal), the presence of this group
does not seem to have affected their participation in decision-making.
Mantoor villagers were in conflict with some of their neighbours because of restricting the use of
forest resources. Two incidents in particular led to serious physical clashes. The Mantoor villagers
explained to the offenders that if the issues were not sorted out locally they would have to seek
judicial help. At present there are fewer offences from the neighbours.

The above information has been compiled from information received from Mr. Satya Srinivas,
APNGO network , Andhra Pradesh, and an interview with Hanumayya (VSS member) during a
field visit to Mantoor by Neema Pathak (Kalpavriksh) , Girija Godbole, and Sowmithri and Satya
Srinivas (AP NGOs Committee for Community Forestry) in June 2001.

For more information contact:

Sowmithri V.R.
AP NGOs Committee on JFM
3-4-142/6, Barkatpura
Hyderabad – 500027
Ph: 040-7564959/ 7563017
E-mail: swomi_vr@hotmail.com

Endnotes
1
The state governments established Forest Development Corporations (FDC) to cater to the needs of forest-based
industries, to take care of marketing strategies and to undertake agroforestry. These corporations have been leased
forestland by the state forest departments for undertaking commercial plantations. According to a 2006 report of
the National Forest Commission, most of these corporations are either incurring huge losses or making profits by
harvesting forest produce, which is often counter-productive to the forests and people dependent on them. Many of
them have converted forests to monocultures.
 CCA/Andhra/CS7/Nellore/Nelapattu and Vedurupattu/Heronry

Nelapattu and Vedurupattu villages, Nellore

Background
Nellapattu and Vedurupattu are two villages situated in Doravarisatram Mandal of Nellore district
of Andhra Pradesh. They have one thing in common—since time immemorial these villages have
played hosts to a diverse species of birds such as Asian open-billed stork, black-headed ibis, cranes
and coromorants that visit these villages between the months of October and May for nesting.
These avian visitors avail of their food supply from the neighboring Pulicat lake and breed on
the tamarind trees that are located in and around the fringes of Vedurupattu. Similarly the birds
of Nelapattu reside on the bund, and breed on Barringtonia sp. trees that are located inside the
village and in the tank area. They avail of their food supply from the tank as well as the Pulicat
lake.

Towards community conservation

The villagers recall that these birds have been visiting their village for generations and that
offering protection to these birds has been an old tradition. The villagers believe that the advent
of the birds in their village is a good omen and a forecast for good monsoons. (Water scarcity
for agricultural purposes is a crucial issue in this region.) The prime occupation of the villagers is
agriculture and paddy is the main crop. The villagers also use bird droppings (guano) as a fertilizer
to enrich their soils.
The villagers are very welcoming and warm-hearted towards the birds and even very young
children are trained not to disturb or cause any harm to them. In the event of any accidental fall
of the young ones from their nests, the village women nurture them and, if required, send them to
the neighbouring Tirupati National Park for treatment. There have been instances of confrontation
faced by the villagers with the neighbouring villages that have attempted poaching.

Opportunities and constraints

The Nellapattu tank was a traditional irrigation tank for the villagers. Besides the surrounding
area was being used for grazing purposes by the villagers. In 1997 the forest department (FD)
took over the protection of the Nellapattu tank by declaring it a sanctuary. The intention to declare
the sanctuary was notified on 15 September 1997 wide notification G.O. Ms. No. 107 and the
completion of procedure took a period of about two years. The area of the sanctuary is 4.58 sq.
km. It is now one of the 11 protected areas in Andhra Pradesh. The government did not consider
the utility of the tank for the villagers while declaring it a sanctuary. The people of Nelapattu
were not aware of this decision taken by the government. Later on, with the help of a local NGO
called CAMEL, the villagers came to know about the notification and immediately submitted their
concerns to the Mandal revenue officers and forest officials. On declaration of the sanctuary, the
entire tank area of Nellapattu was fenced off. The entry was restricted only to those visitors who
case studies - andhra pradesh

would come for bird-watching within a specified time during the day. These restrictions imposed
by the FD have caused many hardships to the local villagers.
Subsequently, Nellapattu village was selected as one of the eco-development sites under the
World Bank-supported Andhra Pradesh Forestry project. As part of this scheme an eco-development
committee was formed in the village by the FD. Due to the availability of funds from the scheme,
borewells were also dug for a few beneficiaries, which could only be utilized by the well-to-do
villagers. In addition, smokeless chullahs and solar cookers were also distributed to the members
of the Eco-Development Committees.
The eco-development scheme, however, does not address the fundamental issue of people’s
access to the tank and their traditional relationship with the birds. The activities prescribed in the
plan for village development are neither conceived nor designed with the help of the villagers. In
Nellapattu the villagers complain of no scope for development of fodder and fuel requirements
of the villagers. The digging of borewells has not been able to meet the diverse requirements of
125
126 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

water for crops, cattle and the other needs of the entire village. The
cattle grazing issue has also not been dealt with in the eco-development
scheme. If the cattle are caught within the fenced area, the concerned
villager has to pay a fine. In circumstances like these, many villagers
have been compelled to sell their cattle. The villagers argue that they
were the ones who offered protection to the birds before the FD came
into the picture, and now the needs of the birds have taken priority over
theirs.

Conclusion
Nellapattu is a classic example of conservation authorities not
understanding the local circumstances and social issues related to
conservation. The villagers had been protecting the birds in Nellapattu
for generations. This heronry had gained fame among bird-watchers
much before it was declared a sanctuary. Due to the villagers’ efforts,
the tank became a heronry and was declared a sanctuary. The sanctuary
was declared without consulting or informing the villagers and this Heronry at Nellapattu Photo:
Subramaniam
has strained the relationship between the people and the birds. The
birds, which were once considered as harbingers of good fortune, are
now considered to be a symbol of misfortune by the villagers. In the long run the apathy and
indifference among the villagers caused by this situation is bound to threaten the security of the
birds themselves.

This case study has been compiled using information provided in S. Srinivas, ‘Village Bird
Buddies 2001’, unpublished report (Hyderabad, APNGOs Committee, 2001).

For more information contact:

Satya Srinivas,
AP NGOs Committee on JFM
3-4-142/6, Barkatpura
Hyderabad – 500027
Ph: 040-7564959/ 7563017
E-mail: satyavallet@yahoo.com
 CCA/Andhra/CS8/Visakhapattanam/Sova/Forest protection

Sova village, Visakhapattanam

Background
The story of Sova village is a reflection of how government interventions, whether legal or
administrative, are completely indifferent towards the socio-cultural ground situations. These
interventions often disintegrate positive community action rather than supporting them.
Sova village is located in Visakhapattanam district close to the Orissa border. The dominant
community residing here are the Malis, and many of their kin reside in Orissa. This village has
been settled in the last few decades due to the influx of people displaced from various development
projects who were not provided any resettlement package.

Towards community conservation

Due to constant encroachments, migration of displaced people and many years of unregulated
use, the forests in this area have degraded completely. The level of degradation was so high that
the locals named these hillocks borke (degraded) forests. Over a period of time the local villagers
began facing the impacts of depleting resources. Some of the villagers had visited their relatives
in Orissa and were inspired with the community forestry being practiced there (see case studies
from Orissa state in this volume). Hence the villagers took charge of patches of adjoining reserved
forests and started protecting them from unregulated use. The efforts towards conservation
resulted in the regeneration of the forests.

Opportunities and constraints

In the late 1980s, the forest department decided to cut down these regenerating trees and started
planting commercially useful fast-growing species. The department also imposed restrictions on
the access of villagers to these resources. Due to these rules enforced by the FD, people terminated
their series of efforts towards forest protection and were compelled to steal fuelwood from the
area that they preserved. The intervention of the FD resulted in resource exploitation of the forest
area. Later on the Sova villagers, along with the help of four other villages, moved on to offering
protection to another patch of forest, which was beyond the legal demarcations of a reserved
forest (RF).
In 1993-94 despite the opposition raised by local NGOs, the government started joint forest
management (JFM) in these forests. The advent of JFM meant an introduction of a formal institution
in the village and an inflow of external funds. However this adulterated the entire concept of
conservation and led to several conflicts, eventually leading to the murder of one of the community
leaders. However, to date the community continues to protect the forest with their traditional
guards and a good part of the hills have been regenerated. People now have increased access to
firewood, fodder and resources for domestic use. The JFM programme has managed to sustain
village conflicts amid a politicised atmosphere. In the second phase of the World Bank project—the
community forest management (CFM) programme—these villages were denied extension of the
benefits under the second phase for being critical of the project and highlighting the violations to
case studies - andhra pradesh

the World Bank. Villagers consider this a very vindictive reaction of the department.

This case study has been contributed by Bhanumathi from Samatha, a group working on anti-
mining and tribal rights issues, based in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. Updated in 2006.

For more information contact:

K. Bhanumathi
Director, Samatha
Plot 154, Sector - V, Visalakshi Nagar,
Visakhapatnam - 530043
Email: samatha@satyam.net
Ph: 0891 2737662
127
Arunachal Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh: Community conservation in
the land of wilderness
Ruchi Pant

1. Background
1.1. Geographic profile
The largest state of north-east India, Arunachal encompasses an area of 83,743 sq km, and
shares international borders with Bhutan in the west, Tibet in the north and Myanmar in the
east. Arunachal Pradesh attained statehood in 1987, prior to which it was a Union Territory since
1972.

1.2. Ecological profile

Biogeographically, Arunachal is situated in the Eastern Himalayas and has been identified as a
global hotspot of biodiversity. This is due to its location at the junction of the Paleoarctic (Indo-
Chinese) and Indo-Malayan biogeographic realms.
The total area under forest cover in Arunachal is 51,540 sq km (62 per cent of the total geographical
area) of which 36,210 sq km are classified as unclassed state forests (USF) that are under de facto
control of local communities. Only 19 per cent of the total forest area (or 11 per cent of the total
geographical area) is under the category of reserved forests.

1.2.1. Floral and faunal diversity

Nature has been extremely benevolent to Arunachal Pradesh. It has been endowed with a diverse
and magnificent wildlife. There are over 5000 species of flowering plants, 85 mammals, over 500
birds and a large diversity of insects, reptiles and other flora and fauna.
Arunachal Pradesh has many species of endangered, endemic, primitive and relict flora. Magnolia
pterocarpa is one such primitive angiosperm found in the foothills. Some other rare and endangered
flora found in Arunachal Pradesh are Amentotaxus assamica, Rhododendron arunachalense,
Rhododendron dalhousieae and Tetracentron sinense. The state harbours about 52 species of
rhododendrons, 18 species of hedychium, 16 species of oak, 33 species of conifers and a large
number of ferns and lichens. Of the about one thousand species of orchids found in India, six
hundred are reported from north-east India, and Arunachal alone boasts of nearly five hundred
species. Orchids have influenced the culture and belief of the local people and many species are
considered sacred. A few orchids have medicinal properties, e.g., Cleisostoma williamsonii, used
state chapter - arunachal pradesh

for healing bone fractures.

The fauna of Arunachal Pradesh is equally rich with as many as 25 species of mammals included
in Schedule I of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Large herbivores of the foothills and adjoining
plains are the Asian elephant, gaur and wild buffalo. Four species of deer are found in the state:
barking deer and sambar are confined to dense forests; the hog deer is found in comparatively
open areas; and the musk deer, is seen in the alpine zone.
Arunachal Pradesh is perhaps the only state with four major cat species: tiger, leopard, clouded
leopard and snow leopard. Lesser cats like the golden cat, leopard cat and the marbled cat are also
found here. Seven species of primates—Hoolock gibbon, slow loris, Assamese macaque, rhesus
macaque, pig-tailed macaque, stumped-tailed macaque and capped langur—are also reported from
the forests of the state. This is the only state where all three goat-antelopes of India—mainland
serow, goral, takin—are found. The highly endangered hispid hare is seen in low grassy areas of
the state. Among the smaller mammals, several rodents (squirrels, porcupines and rats), civets,
mongooses, spotted linsang, shrews and many species of bats are also found in low grassy areas
of the state.

131
132 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Over five hundred bird species inhabit Arunachal Pradesh including some endangered and
endemic ones like the white-winged wood duck, Sclater’s monal, Temminck’s tragopan, black-
necked crane, Mishmi wren or rusty-throated wren warbler and the Bengal florican. This is the
richest state for pheasants, with some ten species occupying different altitudinal zones ranging
from the plains to snowy heights.
The Siang river valley (the Tsangpo is called the Siang as it enters India in Arunachal Pradesh,
and later the Brahmaputra when it enters Assam) in Arunachal Pradesh is one of the two important
corridors of Indian migratory raptors. Of the 63 species of raptors reported in India, about 75 per
cent are reported from these two North-eastern states. A total of 22 raptor species were recorded
in a survey carried out under the aegis of ATREE, of which 10 are near-threatened and three are
vulnerable species.

1.3. Socio-economic profile

With a total population of 864,558 (1991 Census), human density in the
state is low. Besides harbouring a rich diversity of flora and fauna, the
state can also boast of being home to myriad tribal communities: there are
25 major tribes and more than 110 sub-tribes that together comprise 63
per cent of the state’s population.
Land use includes jhum and permanent cultivation, forest plantations,
tea plantations, horticulture, timber harvesting (stalled for the time being
to a great extent), grazing grounds, religious and ceremonial grounds, and
bamboo-pine groves. Cadastral surveys have not been conducted and a
land revenue system has not been introduced. No land records or records
of rights are maintained by the state. People do not have any land pattas
(title deeds), which is a hindrance, as people have no collateral while
applying for loans. Tribal elders are aware of traditional boundaries that are demarcated by natural
features like rivers, hills, rivulets, hillocks, etc. A large part of the land (including the forests) is
under the control of local communities. Despite the lack of land records, distinct patterns of land
ownership are observed among different tribes in the state.
In the past, an absence of land titles did not have any implications, but the state government has
recently begun demanding land ownership certificates from beneficiaries of government-sponsored
schemes.

2. A brief history of administrative control over land and

resources
Till 1914, the present state of Arunachal Pradesh was an administered territory. In 1914, the
British Government formed a separate unit of administration for this area and named it the North
Eastern Frontier Tracts, placing it under the charge of Political Officers. These were inner-line
areas, which implied that no foreign resident and no non-natives were allowed to cross over this
line into the territory without a permit.1
The north-eastern region of India is unique in its adjudicatory structures. The judiciary is not
a distinct entity in Arunachal: there is no High Court in the state nor has a special bench of the
Court been appointed to the state. Within the state, the civil administration performs the role of
the judiciary. The DC is the highest judicial authority under statutory law at the state level and
the forest department and its officials have been vested with the powers of a civil court.2 Appeals
protesting violations of fundamental rights or seeking reversal of the DC’s or forest department’s
orders must be filed with the High Court of Assam in Guwahati.
The uniqueness however, stems from traditional tribal village councils that are empowered to
exercise judicial and administrative functions within the village. The judicial authority of these
councils was formally recognised under the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation
of 1945. Under the Regulation, besides traditional village councils, institutions called the Village
Authority have been created. The DC of the district appoints members to the Village Authority, who
may or may not be members of the traditional village council. The Village Authority exercises limited
powers in matters of village administration, while the traditional village council has enormous
power under the tribal customary laws. Village authorities settle all civil matters and criminal
matters of non-heinous nature according to customary law.
 Arunachal Pradesh 133

The village council is the primary redressal forum

for violations of customary law. While nomenclature
and structure of councils may differ from tribe to
tribe,3 the basic concept of justice is the same in
most tribes. Cases are usually settled outside of
formal courts and a written note of the final decision
is sent to the office of the DC.4
If this does not happen, the dissatisfied party can
approach the DC. The DC arbitrates over conflicts
with the help of a Political Interpreter who assists
in interpreting customary law and social practices.
If the disputants have approached the DC directly,
he/she would normally send them back to the
village institution. Sometimes, the DC may call the
members of the village council and decide the case
in their presence or may ask the village council to
decide the matter in his/her presence.
Many of the socio-religious values that assisted
natural resource conservation are now eroding, an
effect that is telling on the state of resources as
well as on the social structures within communities.
Although the dispute settlement authority continues
to remain with the village councils and the gaon
buras (village elders), some plaintiffs have started
approaching the formal judicial bodies for settlement Use of bamboo in an Apatani house
Photo:Rupesh Bhomia
of disputes. This practice is being observed largely
amongst the village elite. Some people look upon it as a status symbol to take a matter outside
the state for resolution.
Since there are a number of institutions that deal with disputes and violations of regulations,
people can ‘shop’ for the forum they would like to take their plaints to: the village council, the forest
department, the DC’s Office or the High Court in Guwahati. Quite often, the guilty party prefers
to approach the formal judiciary, especially when he knows that he will get a severe punishment
if tried by the traditional village council. Multiple adjudicatory systems however, often punish
offenders twice for the same offence: in a case involving an Adi who killed a tiger in self-defence,
he had to endure both the punishment detailed by the village council as well as the judicial remand
to which the forest department subjected him.5
Several instances have recently come to light where Government authorities, including the Army
and the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), have acquired lands (including forests) for the purposes
of setting up security posts, townships and administrative establishments, but have paid minimal
or no compensation to the tribal community. Traditional regulatory systems are often inadequately
equipped to deal with cases involving non-tribal or government authorities, and this is reflected in
the increase in the number of cases reaching the High Court of Assam in recent years.

2.1. Legal classification of forests

state chapter - arunachal pradesh

The area of forests under reserved forests, protected areas (wildlife sanctuaries and national
parks) and village forest reserves is about 37.32 per cent of the total forest area in the state (see
table 1 for details). The recorded forests cover 61.5 per cent of the total geographical area of the
state covering 51,540 sq km.
Since there is no land revenue regulation in the state, the legal status of forests outside reserved
forests, Wildlife Sanctuaries and National Parks, is not well defined.
134 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Table 1: Legal status of forests

Legal status of forest Area in sq.km.

Reserved forest (RF) 9815.37

Wildlife sanctuary (WLS) 6777.75
National parks (NP) 2468.23

Village forest reserves (VFP) 175.20

Total 19236.55
Anchal forest reserve (AFR) 256.08
Protected forests (PF) NA
Unclassed state forest (USF) 32039
51540 (61.54% of total
Grand total geographic area)

Forest nationalisation in Arunachal Pradesh is a post-independence phenomenon. The state forest

department, while blaming the practice of jhum (shifting cultivation) for the rapid degradation
of forests, attempted to bring USFs under central control by declaring AFR, VFR, RF and PA.
Declarations of RFs have been faulty and most people have no idea when their forests were
converted.
Local communities consider the creation of state-controlled forests from erstwhile unclassed
state forests as an encroachment on their lands by the forest department. The Department on its
part alleges that, by not moving out of RFs, people are encroaching on government property. In
some cases people have cleared plantations in reserved forests in order to reside there. In two
instances where eviction orders were issued, the villagers (of the Nishi community) filed separate
Public Interest Litigations (PILs) in the Guwahati High Court. The judge sympathised with the
people, ordered a stay on the evictions and issued a show cause notice to the forest department
demanding to know why the people should not reside there. In another PIL, an individual challenged
the conversion of his clan lands to reserved forests, alleging that due process had not been adopted
by the forest department during the notification.
The declaration of the Tale Valley Sanctuary in 1995 created much discontent amongst the
Apatanis. They feel that their efforts towards the conservation of the resources of the valley
have been ignored because the forest department has not involved the local community in PA
management. Though the present WLS was created from declared RF (and the department was not
legally required to settle any rights), the Apatanis challenged the very process of RF declaration.
They filed a case in the High Court in Guwahati claiming that the sanctuary stood on Clan Forests
and stating that the forest department had not applied due process while declaring the forest a
RF. The Court disposed off the matter directing the Government of Arunachal Pradesh for a fair
settlement of the case, yet the dispute remains unresolved. The boundary issue could never
get resolved and in the years that followed resulted in the filing of another matter involving his
grandson.6
AFRs were declared under the Anchal Forest Reserve (Constitution and Maintenance) Act, 1974,
with an idea of sharing the net revenue earned in the ratio of 50:50 between the department
and the anchal samiti (a panchayat unit, now scrapped). Anchal is a unit formed from a group of
villages. Problems began to arise at the time of revenue sharing. Problems also arose because
proper procedures were not applied at the time of creation of anchal forests. At the time of creating
AFRs, the forest department is supposed to get the consensus of all villagers involved in this, but
most often the department took into confidence only the village leaders, which was later challenged
by the larger community. In 1975, the state amended the law for the constitution of AFRs and
introduced a new category of VFRs, with the aim of reducing conflicts related to benefit sharing
by demarcating VFRs village-wise. Gradually the government lost interest in these categories,
which is evident from the figures related to AFR and VFR in the table. In the late 1980s, the state
forest department introduced the scheme of Apna Van with the objective of reafforestation of USFs
degraded due to jhum cultivation. It gave saplings and provided maintenance expenses to the
beneficiaries for a period of three years. People lost interest in this scheme soon after the three
years were over.
 Arunachal Pradesh 135

3. Elements of community conservation

Elements of nature have traditionally been either worshipped or have formed part of ceremonial
rites and rituals. Certain trees were considered sacred, while some fruits, flowers and animals held
a special position in community rituals and festivals. As these species held great importance for
the community, controlled utilisation led to conservation. For instance, among the Apatanis, rites
conducted during the Mloko festival (celebrated in rotation by a group of villages together) require
the paw of a monkey (species not clear) and a monkey skull. Representatives from all the villages
would participate in this annual hunt, but only one monkey from one community forest would
be killed: people believe that this system ensured the availability of the monkey for the coming
festivals. The tiger holds a significant position among the Adi and some other tribes of Arunachal:
they consider the tiger to be their elder brother. Even accidental killings of a tiger are followed by
an arduous year-long penance during which the person has to live in isolation, cook his own food
and is not permitted to participate in community festivals and rituals including hunts.7
Sentiments towards certain species of plants also derive from the sites where they are planted.
Sometimes a species is protected for its great value to society: the Apatanis consider pine trees
planted by their ancestors as sacred, and even decaying trees of these species are not felled for
private or commercial use. Instances have come to light where fallen sacred trees have been used
for purposes of community welfare—for example, planks are used as walks to cover marshy and
muddy patches on dirt tracks during the rains. Apatanis use flowers of the plum tree (thakum) in
rituals and hence the tree is considered sacred. Taboos are also associated with some trees: local
lore warns that persons felling trees regarded as the abode of a deity will result in the death of one
of their family members.
Self-imposed restrictions developed by communities have always regulated resource use
and extraction in Arunachal. Two decisions of the village council in a Nishi village show the
understanding of the people about their forest and environment. In a case of over-extraction of
cane from a community forest, the nyel (the village council of the Nishi community) adjudicated
that an individual can extract cane from the community forest only for personal use and not for
commercial purposes. In another case of a person raising a mustard plantation in a degraded
community forest, the nyel decided that nobody start plantations in community forest areas. Its
order included the observation that degraded forests should be allowed to regenerate and grow
into a mixed forest, as mono-cropping is not good for the health of the forest.
Lands were traditionally reserved for meeting the domestic needs of people such as firewood,
cultivation (both settled and jhum), grazing and browsing grounds, hunting, medicine and dyes,
material for house building, sacred sites for rituals and burial grounds, etc. Rights over water
bodies such as streams and rivers were also clearly defined. Though conservation may not have
been the central objective of such traditional land management systems, a closer look reveals the
tremendous conservation value inherent in some of them. Illustrated by the traditional land and
resource management systems of the Apatani of the Lower Subansiri District and the Adi gallongs
of West Siang District in the sections that follow (for details on these see the case study section).

3.1. The Apatanis of the lower Subansiri district

Apatani people, occupying the
Apatani valley8 in Arunachal, are
state chapter - arunachal pradesh

considered to be the most industrious

and enterprising community in
Arunachal Pradesh. They are mainly
engaged in farming and also rear
pigs, fowl and mithun (Bos frontalis,
a semi-domesticated bovine). They
follow an integrated approach to
management of their resources
such as forests, water, bamboo-pine
groves, etc. This fact is attributed
to the limited land at their disposal.
The Apatani valley with a population
density of 625 is the most populous
area within the state (compared with
the state’s average population density
of only 10 persons per sq km). The Layout of an Apatani forest settlement and agricultural fields
Photo: Rupesh Bhomia
136 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

total Apatani population in the Apatani plateau is approximately 20,000. Limited resources and a
high population demand conservation and the entire Apatani plateau offers an excellent example
of community resource management. The customs and social practices of the Apatani, unlike other
communities, do not differ between clans or villages.

3.2. The Adi Gallong of Mega, Molo and Dipu villages, West Siang
District
Three villages lie on the river Siyom in the West Siang District (28°33’N and 28°29’N and 94°35’E
and 94°41’E): Mega is on the right bank of the river, about 40 km upstream of Along (the district
headquarters) and across from the Along–Mechuka road; Molo is 25 km upstream of Mega at the
confluence of the rivers Siyom and Sike; and Dipu is 18 km upstream of Molo village on the Siyom
River. Molo and Dipu are close to the roadhead but Mega is across the Siyom on the slope of the
mountain. Close to 200 ha of forests in the vicinity of these villages are protected by the local
community because of sacred sentiments. Fishing is regulated in some stretches of the river and
only traditional fishing equipment is permitted. No specific institution is involved in the protection
of these forests but the kebangs deal with violation of regulations related to land and resource
use. Violations are negligible, as people fear the wrath of supernatural elements. Many taboos are
attached to felling of trees and killing of certain animals in forests, preventing people from violating
socially accepted norms with respect to these forests.
The exact reasons behind the preservation of these forest patches by the Adi Gallongs are
unknown, but the kebangs unanimously rejected the felling system under the timber permit scheme
of the State Government. The forest department has respected this decision.

4. Conclusions
Over the years since independence, Arunachal Pradesh has witnessed tremendous changes.
Tribal society has not been immune to cultural as well as religious invasions.9 The weakening of
the social and moral values has allowed for the setting-in of the process of degradation of the
natural resources in recent years.10 Not only has the nature of disputes
arising over forest resources changed, but the number of disputes has
also increased manifold.
In Arunachal’s early days, natural resources had little or no commercial
value and resources were extracted only for personal or community use. People
had no use for money and followed a barter system till very recently.11 With
increasing monetisation of economies and the influx of television media, wants
have increased, and can now only be met by selling assets—in most cases, this
translates to a transfer of ownership rights over their valuable natural resources.
Large immigrations of people from outside the state, including timber merchants
and the gradual realisation of the value of timber, are also factors that have
contributed to the younger generation abandoning traditional value systems in
the desire for more consumerist lifestyles. In the midst of these transformations,
the authority of village institutions has declined. However, since 1993, village forest
protection committees have begun sprouting in the region as a youth initiative, as
the younger generation became increasingly aware of rampant destruction of
resources by external influences, an inequitable distribution of benefits from
resource use and (in some cases) by diminishing cultural factors such as
the effects of taboos and restrictions on resource use. These are distinct
from Forest Protection Committees formed under the JFM programme.
In some areas, Joint Action Committees (JACs) have been formed and
rules framed prescribing sale of residential plots only with the permission
of concerned gaon buras (village headmen) and the JACs. Penalties
for outsiders have also been prescribed if found indulging in jhum
cultivation, hunting, fishing or exploitation of trees of any forest.

4.1. Suggested recommendations for effective conservation

The transmission of traditional customary laws and social practices related to management and
conservation of natural resources to the younger generation should be facilitated by the government
in cooperation with village elders and traditional institutions so that the new generation can take
 Arunachal Pradesh 137

pride in and respect their own regulatory systems.

Recent Supreme Court orders—first in 1996 banning felling in forests, and a subsequent order in
February 2000 prohibiting the collection of NTFP from reserved forest and protected areas—have
had differential impact on the local communities. Where the decision of the Court in the first
matter left local tribal communities with no options for eking a livelihood from the forest, the
latter judgment didn’t have such a severe impact on the people and their livelihood. Earlier local
people would sell their timber permits to saw mills or other traders (sometimes a single permit
would fetch anywhere between Rs. 600 – Rs. 60,000 depending on the species). This had a serious
impact on the lives of the local people, which led to the increase in the rate and extent of extraction
of NTFPs such as cane and medicinal plants. As compared to the order in the first case, the order
of the second judgment wasn’t implemented in its letter and spirit. These orders have been issued
in spite of the fact that these forests are under community control and the fact that forest cover
in the state is nearly 80 per cent, far above the National Forest Policy recommendation of 66 per
cent for hilly regions.
Proper policy with regard to collection and processing of NTFP to benefit local communities is
a felt need. The state will have to make a concerted effort to develop wood-based industry to
make opportunities available for the local populace, keeping in mind the attitude and flair of the
people.

Ruchi Pant is currently with United Nations Development Programme, Delhi.

Acknowledgements
Information for the case study on the Atapani valley has been elicited in March 2001 from
Mukul Sharma, Sr. Teacher; Nawung Phuntso (a Monpa), Headmaster; and Ali, Teacher, Sangti
High School; some information was gathered from Prakash Gole, Ecological Society, Pune, via
telephonic conversation in March 2001. Kolita, Headmaster, Sangti High School, assisted through
a personal conversation in August 1995. Soumen Dey, WWF – Itanagar Field Office, has also
assisting in plugging the gaps in the case study.

Endnotes
1
This Regulation continues to be in force even today.
2
Vide section 72 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927.
3
For example, kebangs of the Adis, buliangs of the Apatanis, nyels of the Nishis, and bangos of Hill Miris.
4
Many such cases in the field of forest management have been extensively documented. See R. Pant, Legal Appraisal
of Unclassed State Forests in Arunachal Pradesh (Delhi, CEL, WWF-India, 1996).
5
Personal communications with a former Deputy Wildlife Warden (who also happens to be an Adi) in October 2001.
6
R. Pant, ‘Conflicts, Resolution and Institutions in Forest Resources Management: Experiences from the Traditional
Mountain Communities of Arunachal Pradesh’, in K. Seeland and F. Schmithusen (eds), Man in the Forest (New Delhi,
D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd., 2000).
7
In one case involving an Adi killing a tiger in self-defense, he had to endure both the penance, and harassment from
the forest department who subjected him to judicial remand.
state chapter - arunachal pradesh

8
Since the Apatani valley is quite accessible, it has been well surveyed for its flora and fauna. Several agencies such
as the G.B. Pant Institute for Himalayan Environment and Development, Arunachal Unit, World Wide Fund for Nature
– Arunachal office, State Forest Research Institute, Botanical Survey of India, etc., have already surveyed the place.
Christoph von Furer-Haimendorf, a social anthropologist, spent long periods of time in the region many decades ago
and had written several books on the Apatanis.
9
By changing their religion, people are forced to drop their earlier beliefs. Certain practices, wherein the community
used to work together for the preparation of the fields before the sowing, are no longer attended by the Christian
tribals as they have to attend church on Sundays. This used to be an occasion when people could get over their
earlier grudges from the previous agricultural season, keeping disputes under control. After religious conversion,
prohibitions on felling of certain trees, once considered sacred, are made out to be mere superstitions. Ceremonial
prohibitions of felling trees are losing their value.
10
Some of the factors leading to this breakdown are modern education, effect of modernisation, improvement in
road transport and means of communication, commercialisation of forest resources, monetised economy, and mass
movement of people from the remote areas to areas closer to roads and plains. For more details see Pant, Legal
Appraisal. Christoph von Furer-Haimendorf, A Himalayan Tribe: From Cattle to Cash (Berkeley, California, University
of California Press, 1980)
11
The barter system continues to dominate the economy in many parts of the state, especially in the more remote
regions.
 CCA/Arunachal/CS1/Lower Subansiri/Apatani/Sustainable forest and agriculture management

Apatani valley, Lower Subansiri

Background
The Apatani valley1 (or the Apatani plateau as it is also called), bifurcated by the river Kele, is
located in Arunachal’s Lower Subansiri District (93°57’E to 94°12’E and 27°30’N to 27°40’N). The
headquarters of the Lower Subansiri district are located in Ziro, one of the major townships of
the Apatani valley. Ziro is well connected by road with Itanagar, the capital of Arunachal Pradesh,
which lies at a distance of about 100 km from it. The town is also well connected by taxi service
with other district headquarters within the state.
The plateau is bowl-shaped surrounded by high hills and interspersed with paddy fields and
bamboo–pine groves. Nearly 52 sq km in area, the valley lies at an altitude of 1524 m with
temperatures on the cooler side. Although it doesn’t snow, elderly people of the valley remember
water freezing up during winters. This does not happen now.
The valley lies between the river valleys of Kamla and Khru on the north and Palin on the south.
All these rivers eventually drain into the Subansiri river, a tributary of the Brahmaputra. The
villages are situated at the periphery of the circular valley with tropical evergreen, sub-tropical
grassland formation, and sub-tropical evergreen forests.
The higher altitudes have vegetation like east Indian almond, dhale katus, siriasing, amari,
chaplash, kanak champa, sal and hirda, ferns, orchids and araceous species. Red silk cotton tree,
screw-pine and the rare species Hyptianthera stricta occur along the banks of the river and along
the streams. Apatanis have extensively planted rawami and bamboo in the surrounding hillocks as
sources of material for construction of houses and household articles. The occurrence of Himalayan
white pine is shrouded in mystery as it does not grow anywhere else in this area. The Apatanis
claim that their ancestors brought them from Central Mongolia when they migrated, a place that
they believe they originate from.
The fauna comprises the tiger, golden cat, large Indian civet, spotted linsang, common palm
civet, Himalayan palm civet, jackal, Indian elephant, sambar, barking deer, gaur, Indian wild boar,
Assamese macaque and capped langur.
The area witnesses copious rainfall throughout the year at an average of 3000 mm. High
precipitation and fertile soils have helped in the growth of luxuriant vegetation. The forest types
broadly are of sub-tropical broad-leaved, temperate broad-leaved, and temperate conifer types,
depending on altitude. In several places, forests are dense with a profuse growth of epiphytes
(mainly orchids and ferns). The hilly terrain in the valley is covered with forests and bamboo-pine
groves, while the flat valley is used for paddy cultivation and pisciculture.
Approximately 10 per cent of the forests in the Apatani valley are under government control,
legally categorised as unclassed state forests (USF). The rest are under the control of family, clan
or the community (village). These lands are managed according to traditional rules governing
case studies - arunachal pradesh

allocation, use and transfer.

The community inhabiting the Apatani valley in Arunachal Pradesh is somewhat unique in its
traditional wisdom and practices. Furer Heimendorf in his earlier writings in the mid-1940s mentions
seven Apatani villages. Recent articles put the number of villages in the valley at around twenty.
The population continues to be confined to the central regions of the Apatani plateau around the
old Ziro or Hapoli township, former headquarters of the district.
Inhabitants of this valley are named variously—Onka Miri, Ankas, Apa Tanang, etc.—collectively
called as the Apatani (Apa means regard and Tani means human race). Apatanis, cohabit with
other tribal groups called Nishis and Hill Miris; but unlike them, they live in nuclear families.
They are divided into a number of clans and each clan lives in a clearly defined part of the
village. They worship the sun (Donyi) and the moon (Polo) and there are several fascinating myths
attached to their deities and their origin which serves to reinforce their uniqueness as compared
to the neighbouring communities. Almost all their festivals are even today connected to nature
conservation and community welfare.

139
140 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Towards community conservation

Another factor that sets them apart from their neighbours who practice shifting cultivation is
their effective utilisation of every inch of cultivable space. This practice has won them fame all over
the world. The typical land use pattern is in concentric circles, with privately owned land as the
epicenter followed by clan land in the middle and common village land at the periphery.
Clan lands are usually not concentrated in one place but are dispersed over many hills. Clan
members can indulge in trapping on such lands, but other Apatanis are also allowed to hunt, earlier
with bows and arrows only, but more recently with firearms too. Since hunting by traps can be
dangerous for others using the forest, within a clan forest, specific areas are assigned to individual
families so that they can each lay their traps with the knowledge of others. Community hunting for
festivals is conducted only in village forests.
Individual families are assigned areas within clan forests for extraction of cane. Individuals can
sell their rights to hunt, trap and extract cane to other members of the clan owning the forest.
Fishing rights depend on the type of ownership of the forest through which the stream or river
flows. Clan land consists of sites for public assembly platforms called lapangs, meadowland for
pasture and burial grounds, and forests for clan owners to hunt and trap animals. Burial grounds
are usually under clan or community ownership, but in some villages clans do not have burial
grounds.2
The Apatani believe that there is no life without bamboo. They build their huts solely of bamboo
and pinewood. Therefore, an integral feature of their villages is well stocked and carefully tended
bamboo and pine groves. Many varieties of wild bamboo grow in the surrounding hills. However,
in their individually owned groves, they grow a variety that is locally known as bije or Japanese
timber bamboo (Phyllostachys bambusoides). This species of bamboo stands up to cold winters
with seasonal frost and occasional snow. This species is only found in this valley and nowhere else
in the region. The blue pine (Pinus wallichiana) is also a characteristic of this area and is not found
anywhere else in the region. The old blue pine trees worshipped by the Apatanis are called Khoda
Satnii in the local dialect.
Pinus wallichiana is also planted in clan forests, but these trees are then considered to be the
individual’s property and not clan property. Anyone felling these trees (other than the owner) is
fined one cow.
The groves close to villages contain a variety of fruit trees and other trees that are considered
sacred, such as the thakum, a plum tree with white flowers. The groves running up the hill slopes
have pine and fruit trees interspersed with a few other trees, whose wood is used for hut building.
The lush pine groves on hillsides surrounding the valley are the evidence of the remarkable forestry
skills of the Apatani.
Common village land is confined to a few insignificant stretches of pasture land inside the valley
and forest tracts on the periphery of the valley.
Privately owned land comprises all cultivated land, i.e., irrigated fields, pisciculture, land suitable
for dry crops, garden plots and groves of bamboos, pines, fruit and other useful trees, as well as
house and granary sites.
The value of land use decreases
with its distance from the centre
and paddy fields, and the pine and
bamboo grown nearer to the house
site are prized more than the ones
some distance away, the reason being
that the Apatanis allow organic waste
generated from domestic refuse to
mix through small channels with the
water that flows from the hill slopes
into the paddy fields, which makes
the water quality richer in terms of
organic nutrients in fields closer to the
village.
A study of the agricultural system
followed by the Apatanis reveals an
indigenous and scientific system which
An Apatani settlement with forest and agricultural fields provides them with surplus paddy
Photo: Rupesh Bhomia to be bartered with the neighbouring
 Arunachal Pradesh 141

communities. The Apatanis are known for their intensive permanent cultivation practices, wherein
every available inch of land is utilised to the maximum extent possible: wet rice cultivation, where
paddy stands in water throughout the season, enables them to practice pisciculture in the same
small terraced fields. Because of the fish, they refrain from the use of chemical fertilisers and
pesticides. On the raised edges of the terraces, which normally remain dry, they grow finger
millet.
Some salient features of their agricultural methods are:
• The laying out of fields on the hill slopes in such a way that the water flowing down the hill can
be channelled inside the fields using an intricate design of contour bunds that divide the plots.
• Prudent use of water emerging from forest water sources and ground water, which erupts through
springs, to cultivate paddy twice a year (one ripening early and the other late in the year). One
set is permanently inundated under water; the other dries out and hardens after the harvest is
over.
• Use of human faecal matter and pig and fowl droppings and decomposed stubble of the last
harvest to act as a fertiliser for their crops.
• The practice of aquaculture by digging a vertical pit in the centre of the paddy field and introducing
fingerlings a month after paddy transplantation is yet another unique Apatani practice. During
August and September, the water is drained out and the fish is harvested.
• The cultivation of two varieties of millet, one on the bunds of the paddy fields and the other in
open dry fields is a peculiarity of the Apatanis.
The only inputs to the agricultural system are human labour and organic wastes generated by the
community, as a result of which the energy efficiency of the system is very high.
Almost every household in the Apatani valley maintains a kitchen garden where beans, chillies,
tobacco, cucumber, taro, ginger, potato, tomato and coarse type of spinach are grown. The
Apatani households also rear semi-domesticated mithun, pigs and fowls, which provide them with
an essential protein supplement. Pigs are considered as a very necessary sanitary institution, as
they feed on human faecal matter. It is interesting to observe that the Apatanis depend upon the
neighbouring communities (the Nishis and Hill Miris) to graze their cattle as their landscape is
better suited for the purpose.

Table 2. Resource use pattern in the USF among the Apatanis3

Ownership Type Resource Use
Individual Kitchen garden, bamboo-pine grove, granary site
Clan land Burial grounds, hunting grounds, wood for house and granary
construction, religious and sacred areas, site for public assembly
platforms (lapang)
Community of village Burial grounds, grazing grounds, community hunting for festivals,
sites for community worship during festivals
All cultivated lands—irrigated rice fields, dry fields, gardens and bamboo-pine groves, and
case studies - arunachal pradesh

house and granary sites—are individually owned.

Grazing lands belong to the village and cannot be sold or purchased. Kitchen gardens can be
acquired by inheritance and/or purchased.

Transfer of Apatani land to non-Apatanis is not permitted, although land does change hands within
the tribe. As cadastral surveys have not been conducted, changes in land ownership are difficult
to trace. Despite the lack of village maps, these land regulation systems have been kept intact for
generations. However, with the monetisation of the area’s economy and the commodification of
forest resources (especially timber and cane), conflicts of ownership have begun to arise.
142 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Social structures in Apatani society that complement the land

management system and help resolve conflicts
Dapos originated as symbolic peace treaties during the settlement of the plateau. Surrounded
(geographically) by hostile Nishi tribesmen, the Apatanis wanted to keep inter-village and
inter-tribal disputes to a minimum and formal treaties of friendship between villages formed a
fundamental part of their political system.4 In the likelihood of disputes arising over boundaries of
forest lands (irrespective of ownership), three poles of (usually) bamboo about 3–4 feet long are
erected in a vertical criss-cross manner to depict a dapo at negotiated boundaries of such areas.5
The dapo still has relevance today, with an added element of threat as resource crunches become
more prevalent6.
The practice of buning or the making of ceremonial friends also helped diffuse inter and intra-
village tensions. Bunings were normally from other clans and tribes. Buning can be inherited: they
are made after long periods of friendship and the relationship is accorded formal status by inviting
bunings to feast at the Mloko festival. Relations are considered severed if a buning is not invited
to a feast.
Some dispute settlement mechanisms in the past, which have continued till recent times, include
systems of oaths and ordeals. To a great extent, these systems kept crime and disputes within the
community to a minimum, as ordeals were generally severe. If the village authorities were unable
to resolve disputes by negotiations and mediation, the practice of ordeals was resorted to. Several
taboos are associated with felling of certain trees and animals. There is a need to document these
practices.
Performances of private and religious rites are common in the villages and these take place quite
often as a part of ceremonies such as weddings or funerals, or reasons as common as an illness
in the family, commencement of house building, a fire in the village, or a personal crisis. During
festivals and religious ceremonies, entry into forests for cutting firewood or extraction of other
resources is not permitted.7 During special ceremonies held at home, members of the family are
not allowed to leave the premises of the house for a period of up to seven days. Violation of these
norms is considered taboo. The Apatanis perform a seasonal rite in July/August in the name of
Yapun, god of thunder. The performance of this rite is believed to ward off the danger of damaging
the crop from hailstorms. No villager is allowed to go beyond the cultivated areas—i.e., to the
forests—during the ten days following the performance of these rites. Breach of these rules could
lead to hailstorms damaging the crops. These rites and restrictions are followed till date.

Opportunities and constraints

The Apatani’s way of life reveals a remarkably developed management system for sustainable use
of bio-resources which is based entirely on their indigenous knowledge and innovations. However,
the elders of the village (gaon buras) express concern over the changing trends in the valley,
which include:
• Introduction of exotic varieties of rice at subsidised rates by the government. This has led to
decrease in growth of local varieties. The elders feel that these imported varieties were not
suited to their soil.
• The village forests have had the legal status of unclassed state forests. In Arunachal, most
unclassed forests have disputed claims: while some consider these to be government lands, local
people consider these as community owned lands. The state government is increasingly bringing
more unclassed forests under their Aanchal Forest scheme,8 under which the management of the
forest rests with the forest department and the revenue is shared between the Department and
the community. The Apatanis do not see any reason why they should share the revenue from
what has been their land since times immemorial.
• The local people are upset about the fact that their ancestral lands were declared reserved
forests by the government in 1976. The villagers had no information about this. According to
them no process of settlement of rights was undertaken. In fact, one clan in the valley has filed
a case in Guwahati High Court against the government, claiming that these lands have belonged
to the clan for generations.
• Tale Valley Sanctuary was declared in 1995 in a part of the reserved forest. The villagers claim
that parts of the sanctuary include their traditional lands. The local people are extremely upset
about the fact that first the reserved forest and then the wildlife sanctuary were declared without
any consultations with the local communities.
 Arunachal Pradesh 143

• To reinforce their claim on the forests, the Apatani community has started erecting boards in
their forests with a warning statement saying that a fine will be levied in case of violation of local
rules and stealing of their resources.
• In 1993, the Apatanis formed village forest protection committees, with the involvement of the
youth. According to the community members the idea about forming this committee came after
a realisation that outside influences and cultural factors such as diminishing effects of taboos and
social restrictions following modern education were causing rampant destruction of forests.

Conclusion
Over many generations Apatanis have evolved an intricate system of natural resource
management. These include efficient forestry and agricultural skills. There is a strong sense of
belonging even today because of the critical cultural, religious and biomass dependence on the
ecosystem. Under the influence of modern education and changing socio-cultural scenario, some
of the traditions seem to have weakened. However, the fact that the villagers have realised the
damage such changes can bring about to their ecosystem and have initiated the village forest
protection committees is a strong indication that community-based conservation can be a success
in the area if the right conditions are provided. One such condition could be a positive wildlife
conservation policy, which would take into account people’s participation in the management and
protection of the ecosystem rather than alienating them by creating conflicts, such as creation of
the sanctuary without their consent or information.

This case study has been put together by Ruchi Pant. The material for the case study has
been extracted from S. Chatterjee, S. Dey, A.R.K. Sastri and R.S. Rana, Conservation and
Sustainable Use of Natural Bioresources: A case study on Apatanis in Arunachal Pradesh (World
Wide Fund for Nature, New Delhi, 2000); R. Pant, ‘Conflicts, Resolution and Institutions in
Forest Resources Management: Experiences from the traditional mountain communities of
Arunachal Pradesh’, in K.Seeland and F. Schmithusen (eds.) Man in the Forest (Delhi, D.K.
Print World (P) Ltd., 2000); People’s Commission on Environment and Development, ‘Report
on Public Hearing on Environment and Development’ (New Delhi, The People’s Commission on
Environment and Development, 2002).

For more details contact:

Ruchi Pant
16 Deshbandhu Apartments,
Kalkaji, New Delhi 110019.
Tel.: 011- 251603984, 09810845648 (mobile)
E-mail: ruchi_kumaon04@yahoo.co.in

Endnotes
1
Since the Apatani valley is quite accessible, it has been well surveyed for its flora and fauna. Several agencies such
as the G.B. Pant Institute for Himalayan Environment and Development, Arunachal Unit, World Wide Fund for Nature
case studies - arunachal pradesh

– Arunachal office, State Forest Research Institute, Botanical Survey of India, etc., have already surveyed the place.
Christoph von Furer-Haimendorf, a social anthropologist, spent long periods of time in the region many decades ago,
and wrote several books on the Apatanis.
2
In these cases, families bury their dead in their cultivated lands within a special enclosure.
3
Christoph von Furer-Haimendorf, A Himalayan Tribe: From Cattle to Cash (Berkeley, California, University of
California Press, 1980).
4
von Furer-Haimendorf, A Himalayan Tribe. As above.
5
These days the literate in the community have started writing a note of warning that mentions the punishment and
the fines a violation would attract on a wooden plaque affixed at the center of the structure.
6
Personal communications with the elders of Hang village during field work in 1985.
7
The period of abstinence during the Mloko festival is known as anyodo.
8
A scheme under which forests are managed jointly by the forest department and the local community. The local
communities see this as an effort by the department to assert their rights in areas which are the strongholds of the
communities and considered by the communities as their own.
 CCA/Arunachal/CS2/West Kameng/ Sangti/Species protection

Sangti village, West Kameng

Background
Sangti village is in the catchment of the Sangti river, in the West Kameng District of Arunachal
Pradesh. It is located at a distance of 11 km from the Bhalukpong-Tawang road, and to go there one
has to get off the road at Dirang, cross the Dirang river and follow the dirt track along the Sangti
river. With an altitude of about 1500 m, the winters here are cold and dry. The landscape is that of
a wide, open valley with paddy fields, some of which are marshy along the river on one side.
The Morpa community which inhabits this area are mainly Buddhists and also followers of the
ancient animist tradition. Rituals involving sacrifice are still prevalent amongst the animists.
Agriculture is one of the occupations practised by the villagers, in which most agriculturalists grow
paddy and maize. Besides this, horticulture, rearing of hens, sheep, cows, goats, pigs and horses
is also practised. The rate of literacy amongst the Morpas is very high, and some of them have
found employment with the government and the army, stationed here.
This open valley has been an ideal habitat for the wintering black-necked
crane, now an endangered species. These birds have been regularly
visiting this valley since the early 1950s. It is an ideal breeding ground for
these avian visitors and the marshy lowlands act as a good source of food
supply for them. At night the birds choose to roost in the middle of the
river on sandy islands with vegetation, in order to safeguard themselves
from wild animals like leopard, jackal, common civet and wild
dog.
The black-necked cranes arrive towards the end of November or
early December and leave the area by early February (this coincides
with the lean period of the villagers). The cranes also feed on insects and
the grains fallen in the fields after the harvest. The birds’ choice of nesting
site is a marshy spot in a field owned by a farmer.

Towards community conservation

The villagers believe that these birds are harbingers of better yield of paddy in the following
season, and that if they do not visit the area, their crops will suffer a pest onslaught. Even the
children in the village are taught at a young age not to tease or cause any kind of harm to the
birds.
Prior to 1990, it was believed that the black-necked cranes had become extinct in India. In 1990,
a Pune based ecologist, Prakash Gole, surveyed the area with the logistic help of the army and
he came across a few birds at a site close to Sangti. The discovery of a so-called extinct species
aroused within him a search to find more of these birds. This brought him to Sangti village where
case studies - arunachal pradesh

he found a roosting population. This ‘discovery’ of the black-necked crane roosting site in India
delighted Gole and he organised several meetings with the local people, the local school authorities
and the army. As an outcome of these meetings it was decided to form a committee that would take
on the responsibility to offer protection to the cranes and their habitat. The Black-necked Crane
Conservation Committee (BCCC) was then formed, which comprised key individuals, including
Kazang Namsay (the village headman, Gaon Bura), D. Siam (Deputy Director, Government Sheep
Breeding Farm), S. Koltia (Headmaster, Sangti Head School), Sharma (Teacher, Sangti School),
and Prakash Gole, (Ecological Society of India, Pune).
The Sangti School, was 1 km away from the breeding site and took the responsibility for
maintaining regular records of the date of arrival, departure and total number of the birds at that
time. It became an important centre for holding meetings, dissemination of information related to
the birds and spreading awareness amongst the student community.
The winter months, being a lean period after the harvest, are also a time for the locals to
rejoice. Very often the area selected for this rejoicing is close to the breeding ground. Very often
picnickers would be playing loud music and littering the place with packing-material waste and
food leftovers.
144
 Arunachal Pradesh 145

In 1994, the army deployed 2 sepoys (guards) to protect the area from such noise-making
parties that scare off the cranes. Simultaneously, in the same year, the road construction work
along the river was stalled after making requests to the Public Works Department, since it caused
a disturbance to the birds. In 1996, the forest department promised to provide free saplings to the
community and the school to plant on the barren hill slopes.

Opportunities and constraints

Unfortunately, after 1994 the movement of the committee slackened due to transfers of some of
the key persons from the area and differences between the army and the forest department. These
differences resulted in the withdrawal of the sepoys who were posted for the bird’s protection. The
plan of afforestation on the hill slopes did not materialise. The local committee was disheartened
since they were expecting a number of tourists in the area but only a few tourists came. In due
course of time the committee disintegrated.
In the meanwhile, despite there being no obvious threat from the villagers or from excessive
tourism due to the Inner Line permit restriction,1 the number of birds visiting the area is declining.
The winter of 2000–1 witnessed the arrival of a lone bird, which stayed only for one day. The
reasons for this could be:
1. The drying up of the marshy land, which is a crane feeding area, caused by the felling of trees
on the hill slopes;
2. As a result of the deforestation on the hills, the temperature has increased, leading to a change
in the course of the Sangti River which now cuts through the paddy field which is a roosting
ground for the birds.
3. Another factor influencing their diminishing numbers is that the farmer who owns the field has
started using chemical fertilizers and pesticides since the past 2–3 years in order to increase
his yield.
4. Continuing picnics and loud noise in areas close to the roosting site.
In 2001, the new headmaster of the Sangti High School and the teachers decided to restart the
conservation process for the birds. The community was identified as the main stakeholder and
it was realised that successful conservation could not occur if they were excluded from it. The
teachers were of the opinion that the reason for the failure of earlier conservation attempts was
that the committee did not consist of enough community members. It was decided that the local
community, along with the various departments like the forest department, Irrigation and Flood
Control Department, the Tourism Department, the Deputy Commissioner, and the local political
leaders, would be given responsibility for effective and long-term conservation. Rekindling the
interests of the people, making them aware of the ill-effects of the use of pesticides and chemical
fertilizers and education about conservation became a part of the new agenda. The status of this
initiative since 2001 could not be ascertained.

This case study is based on information gathered in the year 2001 by Ruchi Pant for this
directory, from the following sources: Personal communication Mukul Sharma (Monpa), Sr.
teacher and Headmaster; Ali, Teacher, Sangti School; Prakash Gole, Ecological Society; Kolta,
Former Headmaster Sangti School, 1995 and Soumen Dey, WWF – Itanagar Field Office.
case studies - arunachal pradesh

Additional information was incorporated from P. Gole, ‘When the Birds come Home’, Down To
Earth. 31 December 2006.

For more details contact:

Ruchi Pant
16 Deshbandhu Apartments,
Kalkaji, New Delhi 110019.
Ph: 011- 251603984, 09810845648 (mobile)
E-mail: ruchi_kumaon04@yahoo.co.in

Endnotes
1
A provision under which all visitors need to get a permit before entering the state.
 CCA/Arunachal/CS3/West Siang/Mega, Malo, Dipu/ Forest protection

Mega, Malo and Dipu villages, West Siang

Background
This case study depicts the conservation efforts undertaken in three villages, namely, Mega, Molo
and Dipu, located along the River Siyom in the West Siang District of Arunachal Pradesh. The forests
protected by these villages are legally categorised as Unclassed State Forests (USFs), under the
Assam Forest Regulation Act, 1891, applicable to the state of Arunachal Pradesh. These stretches
of forests have always belonged to the people and the management of these resources has been
vested with the Adi Gallongs, the local tribe. USFs are not officially declared; but all forests that do
not belong to any of the categories1 of Reserved, Anchal, Village Forest or Sanctuaries and National
Parks are considered as USF in law. Large tracts of forests in the state of Arunachal fall under the
category of USFs, and are used and managed by the local communities.
Mega village is 40 km from Along district headquarters on the Along-Mechuka road. Moyo is
25 km from Mega village and Dipu is 18 km from Molo. The Siyom River joins these villages and
Molo village is situated at the conjuncture of the Siyom and Sike rivers. The state bus is the most
efficient means of transport to get to Molo and Dipu villages. Mega has the largest population with
80 households; Dipu has 30 and Molo 25 households.
These villages are inhabited by the Adi Gallong tribe, which is one of the progressive sub-tribes of
Arunachal Pradesh. The Adi Gallongs are animists and worship different elements of nature. In Adi
society, the tiger is considered to be an elder brother and killing a tiger is considered the biggest
sin. Killing of a tiger either by mistake or even in self-defence attracts very serious punishment in
the form of a year-long period of penance during which the person has to live in isolation, cook his
own food and is not allowed to join the community in various festivals and rituals including hunts.
Adis were hunter-gatherers earlier but subsequently took to jhum (shifting cultivation) cultivation.
The main occupation of the villagers is farming and the main crops grown by them are maize,
mustard, millet, chillies, beans and pumpkin. As the younger generation is getting educated and
not interested in farming, the manpower available for jhum is on the decline. Consequently, many
villagers have now resorted to settled wet rice cultivation. With the rise in education, villagers have
also found employment in government offices.
Prior to 1996, contracting out part of their forests for timber extraction to timber traders was
one of the major sources of income for the villagers. These contracts were usually given out
for secondary forests regenerating on jhum lands. In 1996, the Supreme Court of India banned
extraction and sale of timber from all kinds of forests unless done under working plans approved
by the Forest Department. As the villagers do not yet have approved working plans, the ban has
resulted in a loss of income in these villages. This had led to a heavy dependence on non-timber
forest products from the forest belt adjoining the villages. They collect boulders, stone chips,
gravel, sand, toko or multipurpose palm leaves, charcoal, firewood, bamboo, cane and medicinal
plants. Animal husbandry is yet another source of income to these villagers, who rear mithun
(semi-domesticated cattle), pigs and fowls.
case studies - arunachal pradesh

Topographically, this area is largely hilly and rugged, with some parts of the undulating
mountainous terrain having a steep drop to the river. The community-protected forests are dense
primary forests largely comprising sub-tropical evergreen forest species, with the presence of some
components of tropical forest. Some of the cane species endemic to this general region and found
in these forests include Calamus arunachalensis and Calamus khasiana. Some of the dominant
floral species found in these forests are Actinodaphne obovata, dhup, dhale katus, bastard cedar,
dalchini, thanet, mewa or mauwa, khewanua, Lindera sp., kusavithagari, Phoebe sp., ar kanla,
East Indian almond, Vitex sp., rasamala, Cinnamomum spp., oak spp., hairy mountain fig, orchid,
avacado.
Bamboo and cane species found here include rawthing or giant bamboo, Calamus arunachalensis,
Calamus flagellum, Calamus inermis, takhe-tikhe, phulrua or red bamboo, and chal.
Some common species of mammals found here include barking deer, civet, Assamese macaque,
tiger, leopard, jungle cat, fishing cat, common mongoose, smooth otter, yellow-throated martin,
tree shrew, and hoary-bellied Himalayan squirrel.

146
 Arunachal Pradesh 147

Avifauna species seen in this area include Kalij pheasant, rufous-necked hornbill, pompadour
green pigeon, pin-tailed green pigeon, common snipe, common sandpiper, white-rumped vulture,
crested serpent eagle, harrier, sparrow hawk, common kestrel, and greater racket-tailed drongo.
The Siang River Valley in Arunachal Pradesh is one of the two important corridors of Indian
migratory raptors. Migration of raptors between Palaearctic regions and the Indian subcontinent
occurs principally along two corridors: the Indus river and the Tsangpo-Brahmaputra river (when
the Tsangpo enters India in Arunachal it is known as Siang, and later when it enters Assam it is
known as the Brahmaputra). Out of the 63 species of raptors reported in India, about 75 per cent
are reported from Arunachal Pradesh and Assam. A total of 22 raptor species were recorded in
a survey carried out under the aegis of ATREE, of which 10 are near-threatened and three are
vulnerable species.
Table 1: A checklist of raptors from Siang Valley of Arunachal Pradesh along with their
threat category and status.

Common name Latin name Threat Status

Amur Falcon Falco amurensis FC
Cinereous Vulture Aegypius monachus NT R
Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus C
Crested Serpent Eagle Spilornis cheela C
Eurasian Griffon Gyps fulvus R
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos R
Greater Spotted Eagle Aquila clanga V FC
Greyheaded Fish Eagle Ichthyophaga ichthyaetus NT FC
Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca V R
Jerdon’s Baza Aviceda jerdoni NT FC
Lesser Fish Eagle Ichthyophaga humilis NT R
Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni V FC
Lesser Spotted Eagle Aquila pomarina R
Long-billed Vulture Gyps indicus NT C
Palla’s Fish Eagle Haliaeetus leucoryphus V C
Pied Falconet Microhierax melanoleucos NT R
Pied Harrier Circus melanolucos C
Red-headed Vulture Sacrogyps calvus NT FC
Red-necked Falcon Falco chicquera NT FC
Stepped Eagle Aquila nipalensis R
White-rumphed Vulture Gyps bengalensis NT C
White-tailed Eagle Haliaeetus albicilla NT R
Source: Collar N.J., M.J. Crossby and A.J. Shattersfield. 1994. Birds to Watch 2, The World List of Threatened Birds.
Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International.
Note: C = common, FC = fairly common, R = rare, NT = near-threatened, V = vulnerable.

Towards community conservation

case studies - arunachal pradesh

Close to 200 ha of forests in the vicinity of these villages are protected by the local community.
These are dense primary forests, largely comprising sub-tropical evergreen forest species with the
presence of some components of tropical forest
These forests are undisturbed due to the decision taken by the ancestors of the present generation.
The exact reason for the preservation of these stretches is unknown but has been followed strictly
for generations by one and all in these three villages. Even the system of felling of trees under the
timber permit scheme of the government is not acceptable to the village council. This decision of
these villages is well known and widely respected by all, including the Forest Department officials.
It is for this reason that contractors, traders and forest officials have not approached local people
for felling timber under the timber permit scheme in these forests.
Some officials believe that the true reason for the pristine condition of these forests is their
inaccessibility. The steep slopes of the mountainous forests do not allow people to access resources
there. However, some local people are of the opinion that the reason behind the decision to
preserve the forests is the foresight of the ancestors to provide for the future generations (inter-
generational equity).
148 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

No specific institution is involved in the protection of these forests. The traditional village councils
deal with violation of the regulations related to conservation. Violations are negligible, as people
fear the wrath of the supernatural elements. Many taboos are attached to felling of trees and killing
of certain animals in forests, which are associated with death in the family. Such taboos prevent
local people from violating the socially accepted norms with respect to these forests.
These habitats are also well protected because there exists a buffer area, where people practise
jhum and extract resources for meeting their other requirements. The forest adjoining Mega village
is located on steep mountainous slopes, thus making the resources there inaccessible.
Regulatory rules are not restricted only to the forests but also extend to the local rivers and
streams. Fishing in the nearby rivers and streams is a regular practice and more of a sport and
mode of entertainment for the unemployed youth and old men, though it does add to the food
intake and nutritional balance. Blasting and explosives are rarely used. People have rights over
different stretches of the river. Some parts of the river are community-owned, while others have
family or clan ownership. Ownership over the river can be sold within the clan, mainly for fishing
purposes. Anyone overexploiting the fish resource by use of explosives is punished by the village
council (kebangs). Only traditional fishing equipment is allowed for fishing.

Opportunities and constraints

The stretches of secondary forests in the vicinity of the villages are used for NTFP collection,
bamboo extraction and periodically for jhum cultivation. These are now in a relatively degraded
state and incapable of meeting the domestic and commercial requirements of the locals. If attention
is not paid to these forests, people may eventually be forced to use the resources from the
protected forests.
Another severe threat to the conservation practices in these villages is the erosion of the value
system amongst the younger generation due to modern education. This has resulted in the increase
in the commercialisation of the economy that has inflicted a commodity approach to the forest
resources.
The Supreme Court of India’s order in 1996 banning timber felling without a working plan, and
a subsequent order in February 2000 (in another case) prohibiting collection of NTFP from forest
and protected areas leaves the local tribal community with few options for eking out a livelihood
from the forest. Earlier local people would sell their timber permits to saw mills or other traders
(sometimes a single permit would fetch any where between Rs 600-60,000 depending on the
species). This has led to the increase in the rate and extent of extraction of NTFPs such as cane
and medicinal plants.

Conclusion
Considering that these forests are under community control and existing practices of conservation
are deeply embedded in the customary law, and also considering that the forest cover of the state
is nearly 80 per cent (far above the recommended 66 per cent for the hills as per the Forest Policy),
a proper policy with regards to collection and processing of NTFP to benefit the local communities
needs to be formulated rather than imposing bans of the kind mentioned above. The state needs
to make a concerted effort to develop wood-based industry to make opportunities available for the
local populace, keeping in mind the attitude and flair of the public.
Transmission of traditional customary laws and social practices related to management and
conservation of natural resources to the younger generation is also required with efforts from the
government, village elders and traditional institutions, in order that the new generation takes pride
and respect in their own systems and carries forward the tradition of forest protection.

This case study has been contributed by Ruchi Pant in the year 2001 in her report for the Directory
of Community Conserved Areas in India by Kalpavriksh. The flora and fauna information has
been adapted from the 2001 field notes of Dipankar Ghosh (member, WWF – Kolkata).
 Arunachal Pradesh 149

For more details contact:

Ruchi Pant
16 Deshbandhu Apartments,
Kalkaji, New Delhi 110019.
Ph: 011- 251603984, 09810845648 (mobile)
E-mail: ruchi_kumaon04@yahoo.co.in

Dr. S. K. Barik,
Botany Department, NEHU, Bijni Complex, Laitumkhra Shillong – 793022
Tel: 0364-250106 x227
Fax: 0364-250108
Tel (R): 0364-231698
sk_barik@hotmail.com

Endnotes
1
For more details on the legal status of forests in Arunachal, see the Arunachal Pradesh State Chapter.

case studies - arunachal pradesh

Assam
Assam – an introduction
Location and biogeography
Assam holds a unique position in the country’s strategically very important north-eastern region.
The state is bounded by Bhutan and Arunachal Pradesh on the north; Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland
and Manipur on the east; Mizoram and Meghalaya on the south; and Bangladesh and West Bengal
on the west. The state is open to the mainland of the country on the west through a narrow corridor
(about 40 km wide) between Bangladesh and Nepal. The state extends from 24º09’ to 27º58’ N
latitude and from 89º42’ to 96º01’ E longitude. The state has an area of 78,438 sq km.1
Assam has a monsoon-type climate with a hot and wet summer and a cool and dry winter.
Annual rainfall in the state varies from less than 1000 mm in some parts to more than 6000 mm in
others. The temperature generally ranges between 7ºC (minimum in winter) and 36ºC (maximum
in summer). The relative humidity is found to vary between 60-85 per cent during a year.
The present physiographic configuration of Assam is characterized by diverse features such as
floodplains, marshes and beels (lakes), scattered hillocks, folded hill ranges and old plateaus.
Thus, Assam can be divided into three major physiographic divisions: (i) the Brahamaputra valley,
(ii) the hills of Karbi Anglong and North Cachar, and (iii) the Barak valley. The Bramhaputra and
the Barak are the major river systems in Assam with their flood plains covering around 80 per
cent of the geographical area. The state is dominated by tropical evergreen semi-evergreen forest,
grassland and wetland ecosystems. The total forest cover of the state is 27,826 sq km according
to the Forest Survey of India, 2003. This makes up about 35.48 per cent of the total geographical
area of the state. Of the total forest area about 14,784 sq km is open canopy forest. The total state
reserved forest is 18,242.23 sq km and proposed reserved forest is 3,933.62 sq km.2
The state has as many as 3513 freshwater wetlands. Assam is dominated by two river plains: the
Brahmaputra plains (56,480 sq km) drained by the river Brahmaputra and its 43 tributaries, and
the Barak plains (6962 sq km) drained by the river Barak and its tributaries.

Biodiversity
As many as 102 species of flora belonging to 75 genera are endemic to the state. About 193
species of mammals and more than 958 species and sub-species of birds are so far reported from
Assam. About 750 species of butterflies have been reported. There are 14 species of primates,
which constitute a sixth of the total primate species of the world. 19 cat species are reported from
the state. The state houses 45 Red Data Species of fauna belonging to 19 families. Assam holds the
entire known world population of the pigmy hog, 75 per cent of the world population of the Indian
rhinoceros and the wild water-buffalo and a sizable population of Asian elephants and tigers.

Socio-economic profile
Assam harbours several ethnic groups. The Karbi and Dimasa are the major hill tribes while
Bodo, Mishing, Rabha, Tiwa, Sonowal Kachari and Deuri are the major plain tribes distributed in
different districts of the state. The present population (as per 2001 census) of the state stands
at 26,655,528. There are 16 scheduled caste communities, making up 6.9 per cent of the total
population, while scheduled tribes make up about 12.4 per cent of the total population.
state chapter - assam

The majority of people in the state are engaged in agriculture, with others working in tea
plantations, livestock farming and lumbering. In various hilly areas, shifting cultivation or jhum is
a common practice among certain tribal groups and villagers.

Administrative and political profile

As elsewhere in the country, Assam also has a five-tier administrative framework: state (rajya),
district (jila), sub-division (mohkuma), block (khanda) and panchayat. On the revenue front,
there are two other units called circle (rajah-chakra) and mouza (a combination of a few revenue
153
154 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

villages). There are altogether 23 districts, 48 sub-divisions, 219 blocks, 2,501 panchayats and
25,590 villages in the state.
Constitutional provisions such as Article 371-B; and Articles 244 (2) and 275 (1) of the Sixth
Schedule are operational in the state. Two councils—Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council and North
Cachar Hills Autonomous Council—have got full autonomy to deal with almost all the important
areas like education, agriculture, rural development, veterinary and forests (except the reserved
forest s). In addition to the above two councils in the hill districts, there are four newly constituted
councils in the plains districts of Assam. They are: Bodo Autonomous Council, Kokrajhar; Mishing
Autonomous Council, Gogamukh; Tiwa Autonomous Council, Morigaon; and Rabha Hasong
Autonomous Council, Dudhnoi.3

Conservation
There is growing displacement of people, due to natural hazards like flood and bank erosion
and shifting of river courses, and conflicts among different ethnic groups. This is directly affecting
the interest of biodiversity conservation. Destruction of natural habitats for commercial felling,
encroachment for settlements and cultivation, short-cycle jhum cultivation in the hill slopes,
overgrazing, extension of infrastructure facilities and various development activities pose a serious
threat to the biodiversity of Assam.
As a part of conservation initiatives, the forest department has identified 5 national parks, 16
wildlife sanctuaries, 2 tiger reserves (Manas and Pakhui-Nameri) and 2 biosphere reserves (Manas
and Dibru-Saikhowa).4
Deepor Beel, spread over 4000 ha, is a permanent freshwater lake in the former channel of the
Bramhaputra river, of great biological importance and also essential as the only major stormwater
storage basin for the city of Guwahati. Deepor Beel supports an important fishery, providing
a means of livelihood for a number of local families. Local people traditionally utilise the beel
to collect fodder for domestic cattle; for food such as vegetables, flowers, aquatic seeds, fish,
molluscs; and for other essential requirements. It is a Sanctuary, an Important Bird Area and the
only Ramsar Site designated in the state. However, 22 more Ramsar sites are proposed in the
state.5 46 sites in the state have been declared as Important Bird Areas.6
Joint Forest Management (JFM) was introduced in the state in 1998 and so far 245 JFM committees
have been formed. Along with the above, the FD is also involved in ecodevelopment, involving
local communities, in fringe areas of protected areas and also in conservation of medicinal plants,
endangered and endemic orchids, and bamboo and cane varieties.
The activities of NGOs in the state are many and very diverse, covering environmental education
and awareness, people’s participation in forest and wildlife conservation, sustainable use of biological
resources, promotion of traditional values relating to environment and biodiversity conservation,
integration of interdepartmental activities of the government and bridging the
gap between the people and the government in the fields of environment and
conservation.
The growing initiatives and positive activities of the people and the NGOs
in this regard have been able to draw attention of the government and to
initiate something in this direction. One of the exciting examples of this kind
of effort was observed in Brahmajan near Bihali in Sonitpur district where
an individual, Mahendra Agarwal, has sacrificed a plot of highly valuable
land measuring nearly 1 hectare within his residential plot by the side of
NH 52, where thousands of birds congregate every year during a season
for nesting. It is also reported that in places like Mukalmuwa in Nalbari
district and Purani Gudam in Nagaon district, many individuals have
taken initiatives in conserving trees like simul for nesting of adjutant
storks. As reported by Green Guard Nature Organization there are two
breeding colonies of Greater adjutant stork in Khutikatia and north
Hoibargaon area of Nagaon district maintained undisturbed by the local
people. The efforts of the people for conservation of native flora in the
areas like Hajo and Uparhali in Kamrup district are also worth noting.
Some traditional institutions are generally interested in plantation
of sacred as well as fruit-bearing trees. People’s initiatives to
conserve certain trees of religious and medicinal importance are
commonly observed throughout the state.
 Assam 155

This information has been compiled by Saili S. Palande, Kalpavriksh, based on S. Baruah, State
Biodiversity Strategy And Action Plan Assam, Assam Science Society. Prepared under National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Ministry of Environment and Forests (Government of
India).7 Other sources for specific information are mentioned in the text.

Endnotes
1
Government of Assam, Statistical Handbook of Assam. (Guwahati, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, 1992).
2
Forest Survey of India, State Forest Report of Assam, 2003.
3
Advisory Panel on Decentralisation and Devolution,‘Empowerment and strengthening of Panchayati Raj Institutions’,
A Consultation Paper on ‘Empowering and strengthening of Panchayati Raj institutions/autonomous district councils/
traditional tribal governing institutions in north east India’ (New Delhi, National Commission to Review the Working
of the Constitution, 2001).
4
TPCG and Kalpavriksh, Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report of the National Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan. Prepared by the NBSAP Technical and Policy Core Group (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).
5
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani, Potential Ramsar Sites in India. (Mumbai, IBCN, BNHS and Birdlife International,
UK, 2006).
6
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani, Important Bird Areas of India: Priorities of Conservation (Mumbai, IBCN, BNHS and
Bird Life International, UK, 2004).
7
Contained in TPCG and Kalpavriksh, Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report of the National Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan (as above).

state chapter - assam

 CCA/Assam/CS1/Bongaigaon/Shankarghola/Forest protection

Shankarghola village, Bongaigaon

Background
Shankarghola village is situated in the North
Salmara taluka in the Bongaigaon district of
Assam. The forests of Shankarghola have been
home to a considerable number of mammal
species like the golden langur, wild boar and
barking deer, along with a large number of
avifauna including the black eagle. Legally
these forests are proposed reserved forests (RF)
under the Aie Valley Division, Bongaigaon.
The main communities inhabiting this village
are the Rabha tribe and the Bengali Hindu
community. The village comprises 45 households
of the Rabha tribe and 25 households of the
Bengali Hindu community. Their main source of Community protected forest of Shankarghola
Photo: Ashish Kothari
livelihood is agriculture (rice and jute) in the
low-lying areas. Besides this, they also cultivate chili, ginger, etc. and rear livestock. Some of the
women earn a living from the sale of handloom garments. The socio-economic situation of the
village is not very good, poverty and illiteracy are common problems.

Towards community conservation

The low socio-economic status of the villagers compelled them to sell the natural resources
in their vicinity. There were enough outsiders interested in buying the forest resource that the
villagers were selling cheap. Villagers also started receiving requests for the golden langur. In
the 1980s, huge trees from the forests were being sold at Rs 5 per tree and the golden langur at
Rs100. These activities over a long period of time resulted in forest degradation and the decline in
the population of golden langur, which was otherwise common.
By 1990s, the effect of indiscriminate logging in the forests was clearly visible. The once-perennial
stream Kangalkati, which flowed through the forest, dried up. It was during this period when a
local youth named Hemanta Rabha, who had traveled out of his village for college education,
returned to the village and realized the extent of damage that had been caused. In 1993, he,
along with four of his friends, called for a meeting with all the villagers to discuss the cause of
degradation and prescribe certain protection measures. This led to the formation of a committee
called the Shankarghola Ban Sanrakhan Samiti to protect 50 ha of the forest with Hemant Rabha
appointed as the secretary.
The Samiti consists of one representative from each family. An executive committee of seven
members was also formed to take care of day-to-day functioning. Despite many efforts by the
villagers from Shankarghola, the surrounding villages that use the resources from the protected
patch of forests did not agree to participate in the protection efforts.
The protection efforts of the villagers received some encouragement from the support of the
patrolling Beat Officer, Biswajit Sarkar. The committee was re-formed and renamed as Tinikonia
case studies - assam

Pahar Sanrakhan Samiti. Later an anchalic samiti (Regional Committee) was formed by the DFO
(District Forest Officer) of the Aie Valley Division under the Joint Forest Management Programme
or the Anchal Van Programme.

Impacts of community conservation

The conservation efforts taken up by the villagers over a period of nine years have shown
remarkable results. The hill has revived, along with the Kangalkati stream becoming perennial
once again. Species like the golden langur, wild boar and barking deer are now visible.
157
158 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The villagers believe that the fertility of soils in

their fields has increased and there has been an
increase in the availability of firewood for domestic
purposes.

Opportunities and constraints

The villagers face a constant threat from outsiders
who come from the other side of the hill to smuggle
timber. There has been no help received from the
forest department to resolve this.
Some members of Tinikoniya Pahar Sanrakhan Samiti
Photo: Ashish Kothari

Conclusion
This case study reflects a direct relation between the socio-economic conditions of the villagers
with forest resource exploitation. However, once villagers realize the long-term impact of forest
degradation on their lives, they would come together to conserve resources against all odds. In
this case, despite the villagers initiatives there seems a threat to the forests from outsiders. A little
support here from the government agencies to resolve the issue of external threat as well as local
livelihoods can go a long way in a secure future for the golden langurs.

The above information is provided by Hilloljyoti Singha, Zoology Department, Birjhora

Mahavidyalaya, Assam.

For more information contact:

Hilloljyoti Singha,
Zoology Department, Birjhora Mahavidyalaya,
Nr. Namghar Barpara, Bongaigaon 783380,
Assam
E-mail: hilloljyoti_assam@rediffmail.com
 CCA/Assam/CS2/Dhubri/Chakrashila/Protection of species

Chakrashila Wildlife Sanctuary, Dhubri

Background
The Chakrashila Wildlife Sanctuary is located in Dhubri district of Assam. The forests in the
sanctuary are of dense semi-evergreen and moist deciduous type, with patches of grasslands and
scattered bushes, and several water sources. The climate is temperate, with dry winters and hot
summers followed by heavy rains.
The diverse ecosystem has species like tiger, leopard, golden langur, leopard cat, gaur, crab-
eating mongoose, Indian porcupine, pangolin, flying squirrel, and civet cat.
The tribes that inhabit the fringe villages of Chakrashila are the Rabha and Bodo. Besides them
there are some Garo and the Rajbanshi tribals, along with some Muslim families as new entrants
to the villages. Agriculture is the main occupation of the villagers, with paddy as the main crop.
In addition to paddy, potatoes and green vegetables are grown for home consumption and a few
livestock are kept. Most families own their own looms and weave their own cloth. The income
levels of the villagers are low, and they depend upon the surrounding forest resources in order to
meet most of their daily requirements, such as raw material for houses, agricultural and musical
implements; and for food, fuel and fodder. Most of the protein in their diet comes from the forest
areas in the form of fish, snails and insects. There is a heavy dependence on the perennial springs
of the forest for irrigation and potable water.
Legally the forests of Chakrashila are categorized as USF (Unclassed State Forests).1 The
denudation of forests began here due to the extreme poverty of the local villagers. In order to
earn a daily living, the villagers worked for the affluent merchants who hailed from different
districts of Assam. They used the local villagers’ services as labourers for extraction of firewood
and valuable timber from these forests. Indiscriminate smuggling of sal and other valuable trees
left this more than 5 sq km stretch of once-thick forest completely denuded. The degradation led
to a scarcity of biomass for the local villagers. The major shortfall in the resources that could be
used by the villagers led to the migration of youth to other places to seek employment. Most of
them started working as labourers in the coalfields in Meghalaya, while the others came under the
influence of political ideologies and took up arms. The rise in forest denudation led the villagers
into encroaching deeper and deeper into the forest. This in turn caused further drastic shrinkage
of the forests extending up to 20 sq km.

Towards community conservation

The conservation efforts were initiated by an NGO called Nature’s Beckon,
which has been visiting the area since the 1980s. They realized that the
conservation of Chakrashila would not be possible unless the local villagers
prevented outsiders from exploiting their forest resources. They felt a need
to educate the local people on the importance of conservation for their
own welfare. Towards this objective, in 1985 they set up a temporary
settlement at Jornagra village on the periphery of Chakrashila. Various
activities such as active bird-watching trips and trekking through the
forest were taken up. Complimenting the work of Nature’s Beckon, some
of the village youth showed a keen interest and eventually became
case studies - assam

members of the group. Gradually, the local tribes developed trust

towards the group and held active discussions on the various aspects
of the environment. This group started convincing the people that
the local people were the only ones who could work towards saving
and restoring the natural resources of Chakrashila. Although some of
the villagers were receptive to this suggestion, they expressed their
inability and helplessness to take pro-active efforts to prevent the
powerful merchants and poachers from invading the forests. The
people were made to realize that these actions were a punishable
offence and the benefit of the doubt would rest with the people
who are working towards conservation.
159
160 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The members of Nature’s Beckon subsequently began visiting every house in Chakrashila and
tried to understand the problems faced by them, like poverty, lack of education and poor health.
The emphasis on women participation in environmental management was realized. It took a year
for this NGO to gather the total support of the entire village, and hence November 1988 was
selected for direct action against the poachers and smugglers.
Initially the villagers faced several violent clashes, which led to injuries to some youth, yet
help from the forest department was not sought. They did not want to be dependent on any
external agency for their needs. The youth repeatedly confronted the poachers and smugglers,
often resulting in injury and death. On one such occasion a truck, which had entered the forest
to smuggle trees, was burnt and a huge quantity of saws, axes, other tree-felling equipment and
a few arms were seized. All the seized material was handed over to the forest department. In
appreciation of their dedicated work, the state government rewarded them with an amount of Rs
5,000 from the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund, which further boosted the villager’s morale.
Since the periphery is mainly a sal-dominated forest, the green canopy was restored in no time,
especially with round-the-clock vigilance of the villagers.
Constructive work also began simultaneously in the village itself. Due to paucity of funds, initial
support was provided from the sale of Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFP) such as thatch, bamboo
and grass. Villagers were encouraged to cultivate their traditional foods like wildflowers, edible
roots such as tapioca, and to raise edible insects. They were also encouraged to eat their traditional
foods like snails, field rats and crabs.
Kitchen gardens were raised with help from Nature’s Beckon, who supplied the villagers with the
various vegetable seeds. Poultry and pigs were raised which helped them to sustain themselves
and were an added source of income. Weaving, which is a vital source of income for the tribal
families, was started anew in many poor families.

Impacts of conservation
There was a remarkable effect after conservation efforts by the villagers providing them a
sense of self-respect by way of improvement in their economic condition. They set an example to
adjacent villages like Abhyakuti, Bandarpara, Kaljani, Damodarpur, Banshbari and many others.
These villages approached Nature’s Beckon to provide assistance. When the other villages around
the Chakrashila Hills Reserve joined the effort, the need for an office and a training centre for the
youth and women was felt. A campus, Tapoban, was developed for this purpose at no extra cost,
as most of the work and resources necessary came spontaneously from the villagers. It is now a
vital centre of learning and offers hospitality to naturalists and enlightened tourists from faraway
places. Villagers are taught to plant trees, shrubs, medicinal plants, edible roots, fast-growing
fuelwood trees, fruits and flowers, thatch and bamboo so that they could be spared the drudgery of
collecting these from deep inside the forest. A small project of digging furrows to connect cultivable
land and a perennial source of water has resulted in doubling of production of crops.
A forest area survey was taken up by Nature’s Beckon. A checklist of birds, mammals, reptiles,
plants and other species was prepared. It was discovered that not only was Chakrashila home to
the endangered golden langur but was also a habitat of many other endangered mammals like
Chinese pangolin, crab-eating mongoose, clouded leopard, leopard, gaur, tiger; endangered reptiles
like monitor lizard, water monitor, king cobra, Asian leaf turtle; and endangered birds like great
hornbill, oriental pied hornbill, Eurasian eagle
owl, osprey, black baza, etc. On the basis of
this information, the NGO along with the people
decided to approach the forest department to
declare the area a wildlife sanctuary. It was
thought that this would provide more scope for
the social development of the villages living on
the periphery through eco-development projects.
When the state government remained silent on
this issue, public pressure was created through
repeated appeals and media coverage. During
this period, from 1988 to 1994 plantations were
taken up in the denuded areas on the periphery
of Chakrashila in the villages of Jornagra,
Abhyakuti, Kaljani, Damadarpur,
Bandarpara and Chakrashila. The different
 Assam 161

species that were planted were sal, poma, Sida spp., phulgamari, oxi, kum, bhelu, koroi, sonaru,
jam and simul. Most of them were planted for the golden langur and other wild animals. Artificial
salt licks2 were also created for the animals inside the forest. The villagers volunteered to clear
weeds like lajukilata, jarmony bon, etc., which inhibit growth in the forest. Through all these
activities the villagers continued to zealously guard the forests. Signboards of various kinds were
also installed.
On 14 July 1994, the Governor of Assam notified the area a Wildlife Sanctuary. After the
notification, Chakrashila started receiving funds for the socio-economic development of the fringe
villages. However, the forest department did not discuss the planning or implementation of the
scheme and utilization of funds therein with the villagers or local NGOs. The people feel that
the funds have been misused. Chakrashila is still being protected by the village communities.
Nature’s Beckon has taken the initiative of developing infrastructure inside the fringe villages
of Chakrashila. With the cooperation of B.R. Samal, Deputy Commissioner of Dhubri District,
village roads, wells for drinking water, sanitary latrines for every household and brick houses with
corrugated iron sheet roofing for every family were constructed. The brick houses were constructed
for 160 families, making Jornagra perhaps the only tribal village in Assam with all these facilities
for all the households.

Constraints and opportunities

Some of the constraints of community-based conservation in Chakrashila are:
1. Total lack of infrastructure for the management of the biodiversity (such as specialized field
equipment) for this protected area.
2. Uncertain tenurial rights of the villagers over the forest resources.
3. Lack of knowledge among local people regarding government policies and laws relating to
protected areas.

Conclusion
This case study reflects on the combined efforts towards forest protection by an NGO as well as
the villagers. The main motive of forest protection has been realized by the villagers by way of
understanding its importance and has led to forest regeneration. However there still is a need for
transparent operations between the villagers and the government, as also for regulated resource
use and for changes in the infrastructure.

This case study is based on S. Datta, ‘An NGO Initiated Sanctuary: Chakrashila, India’. In A.
Kothari, N. Pathak, R.V. Anuradha, and B. Taneja, Communities and Conservation: Natural
Resource management in South and Central Asia (New Delhi, Sage Publications and UNESCO,
1998). We are thankful to the author for updating the information in August 2002.

For more information contact:

Somyadeep Dutta
Nature’s Beckon
‘Dutta Bari’, Ward No. 1
Dubri 783301
Assam
case studies - assam

Endnotes
1
These kinds of forests are considered to be acquired by the government but have not been assigned any specific
categories so far. Local communities do not consider these as government owned forests and often continue to use
and manage these as community forests.
2
Salt licks are natural deposits or blocks of rock salt which animals particularly mammals lick. Artificial salt licks are
created in the forest for the benefit of animals by burying 15-20 kilograms of salt into the earth in suitable locations
inside the forest (generally created near waterholes of the forest), which are frequented by wild animals.
 CCA/Assam/CS3/Karbi-Anglong/Khawrakrai/Forest protection

Khawrakrai, Karbi-Anglang District

Background
Khawrakrai village is located near the town of Hamren. This is a small village inhabited by the
karbi tribe. Since 2003 the village is protecting an area of 6.70sq km. Prior to this the entire forest
land was used for jhum (shifting cultivation) by the villagers.
In the 1990s the area was also extensively harvested for a local species of bamboo for paper
mills. Illegal extraction of timber was also common. These activities resulted in severe degradation
of local forest resources. Subsequently, the communities started experiencing scarcity of water,
firewood, grazing land, construction material, wild edible plants, and wild animals in the forests.
Because of an earlier intervention from the forest department (FD), where they had helped
villagers plant some forest species, the communities were already aware of the importance
of forests. With the entry of the NERCORMP-IFAD1 project, the communities decided to revive
protection of their village reserved forests as a community conserved area.

Towards community conservation

The community decided to conserve the area for various reasons, mainly for protecting their
water source. Additionally, their traditional sacred forest was located very close to this area.
NERCORMP-IFAD came to this village in 2001. The communities were organized into Natural
Resource Management Group (NaRMG) and a series of orientations and trainings on livelihoods
and natural resource management were conducted for the communities, including both the NaRMG
and traditional village institutions. All the trainings and discussions were held with the permission
of the village gaon bura (village headman), who is traditionally the sole authority for management
of village reserved forests. NaRMG members were trained and sensitized to assist the village
council in protection, management and governance of the village reserved forests.
Rules and regulations were framed by the villagers with the help and facilitation by the project
team and partner NGO. The rules are quite rigid mostly relating to prohibition and payment of
penalties for violations. But at the same time some rules are quite flexible for poor villagers,
especially for harvesting of non-timber forest produce (NTFP). However, no such relaxations are
provided for the higher income households. For any amendment of the rules a majority of the
villagers have to be present along with the village goan bura. Generally in such meetings the goan
bura would preside.

Impacts of community effort

As per the villagers, after the conservation of this area there has been better water availability.
There is an overall improvement on forest cover and forest regeneration. Some wild animals
are also reported to have returned to the forest area. The conservation efforts have particularly
benefited the poorer households as they can get enough forest resources within their village
proximity.
case studies - assam

Opportunities and constraints

There is an opportunity for increasing the area under CCA provided the NaRMG and village
council (VC) agree. There are also opportunities for the communities to enhance their income from
the village reserve forests if major NTFP, which is bamboo, can be better protected, regenerated
and collectively harvested. However, the constraints are that the area is poorly connected and
remote so economic opportunities are restricted. Investment opportunities, particularly credit
from local sources are also limited which otherwise would have helped the communities improve
their livelihoods through alternative means. Shifting cultivation continues to be one of the major
land uses as available suitable lands for terrace development are limited. Further training and
162
 Assam 163

convergence of activities are needed to benefit the communities from such conservation efforts or
initiatives.

Conclusion
The rejuvenation of village reserves through a mobilized community is a fairly recent initiative.
The reserve in this village is yet to be fully regenerated, and also yet to reach the level of governance
that is completely equitable, transparent and accountable. However, the idea of conservation as
initiated in this village is spreading in the surrounding villages. If only there could have been greater
efforts from the government, the project ideas could have been replicated in many more villages
through the communities themselves with minimal external investment of effort and resources.

This case study has been contributed by Vincent Darlong and Tutumoni Lyngdoh of North
Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas, and Putul Bhuyan
of Karbi Anglong Community Resource Management Society in June 2007.

For more details contact:

Vincent Darlong
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas [NERCORMP-
IFAD],
“Sympli Building”,
Dhankheti,
Shillong 793 001,
Meghalaya
Phone: 0364-2503531, 2500495
Email: drvtdarlong2002@yahoo.co.in

Tutumoni Lyngdoh
(As above)

Putul Bhuyan
Karbi Anglong Community Resource Management Society [NERCORMP-IFAD]
P.O. Hamrem,
Karbi Anglong,
Assam.
Phone: 03677-230123

Endnotes
1
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas (NERCORMP) is a Joint Project
of International Fund for Agriculture (IFAD) and the Government of India, Ministry of Development of North Eastern
Region, North East Council, Shillong, Meghalaya. For more details on the programme, see www.necorps.org
case studies - assam
 CCA/Assam/CS4/North Cachar/New Kubing/Forest protection

New Kubing village, North Cachar Hills district

Background
New Kubing village is located in the North Cachar Hills District of Assam. The nearest town is
Haflong. The village like others in the district had a traditional practice of protecting a patch of
forest as village reserves. This practice was revived under the NERCORMP-IFAD1 programme in
2001.
As per the District Council Act in North Cachar Hills, Assam, when a new village is created or
established, it is mandatory to have village reserve forest of at least 20ha. The village reserve of
New Kubing was first declared in 1950 when the village was established. The reserve covers an
area of 6sq km or 600ha. However, over the years with an increase in the population, pressure
on land began to mount and the villagers began to jhum (shifting cultivation) randomly. In many
cases this even meant encroaching upon the village reserved forest. The traditional institutions,
expected to manage or protect these forests also became somewhat ineffective over years due to
various reasons and influences. Like most other villages, New Kubing, which is inhabited by the
zeme nagas, also experienced similar problems. As a result the traditional village reserved forest
was severely degraded.
Prior to the NERCORMP-IFAD project intervention, the villagers faced water scarcity and change
in local climatic conditions due to encroachment in the reserve forest and degradation of water
catchments areas. After the project intervention and various awareness programmes, the community
felt the need to conserve and protect village reserve forest and water catchment area.

Towards community conservation

The NERCORMP-IFAD programme was initiated in 2001 by organising the local community into
a natural resource management group (NaRMG). A series of orientation and training sessions on
livelihoods and natural resource management were conducted. The members of the village council
(VC) were brought in as members of NaRMG. They were also requested to strengthen the functioning
of the VC, particularly in the areas of forest protection and management. A comprehensive forest
management training was conducted in collaboration with the forest department (FD) on effective
community forest management and revival of community conserved areas.
The community through the NaRMG and VC decided to maintain and protect the old traditional
village reserved forest in addition to a nearby critical water catchment area. They also made rules
and regulations for maintaining this reserved forest, including:
i. Illegal felling of trees will attract a penalty of Rs.500/- per tree, in addition to planting and
maintenance of the equivalent numbers of trees as felled.
ii. Jhuming in the reserved area is prohibited and violation would attract a payment of fine such
as a salem (a buffalo head).
iii. Illegal timbering and killing of wild animals is prohibited. Willful violation of these rules will
result in the eviction of the person/family from the village.
iv. Making proper firelines while slashing and burning for jhum will be mandatory for every
household. Any accidental forest fire has to be collectively attended by all the villagers as a
case studies - assam

fundamental duty.
Before drafting of rules and regulations, the NaRMGs were advised to be more sensitive to the
needs of the poor and the women such that their livelihoods are not negatively affected. In the
initial period the rules were more strict. With the improvement of the forest regeneration and
improved governance, the communities have in recent times revisited their rules and regulations.
Revised rules allow collection of wild vegetables, firewood (only dry branches), mushroom and
medicinal plants to the women and the poorest households as identified by them. In case of an
emergency situation, trees can also be cut for house construction and collection of firewood (such
as marriage of poor households). This is not with the aim to relax prohibitions for the poor, women

164
 Assam 165

and underprivileged, but to improve their livelihood opportunities and income condition through
improved conservation practices. The village is also encouraging every household to carry out
plantations in their respective vacant plots.

Impacts of community effort

NERCORMP-IFAD project interventions, such as training programmes, workshops on
comprehensive forest management, biodiversity conservation and jhum, fallow management,
introduction of participatory land use planning through the use of 3D models of their area, and
others have enabled the communities to visualize the total village area, natural resources within
and around the village, land use system, and so on. This has made the community realize the
importance and values of bringing more forest areas (including fallow land) under community
conservation and also the need to increase the jhum cycle.
As per the community’s views the following reflect the importance of biodiversity conservation:
i) Availability of water throughout the season, for kitchen garden, terrace development, minor
irrigation and drinking water.
ii) Availability of wild vegetables and other NTFP for self-consumption and sale.
iii) Availability of firewood in time of need and requirement.
iv) A healthy environment and improvement in local climatic condition around the village area
due to increased forest cover.
v) Increased income from kitchen garden and terrace development.
vi) Less dependence on jhum, thus making time available for additional off-farm activities such
as piggery, petty business, and so on.
vii) Elimination of hajira (daily wage labour) outside the village, particularly for women.
viii) Gains in human, social, physical and natural assets of the individuals and the community as
a whole.

Opportunities and constraints

The government sponsored Joint Forest Management (JFM) has been introduced by the FD in the
village due to the regenerated community reserved forest. There is a promise for higher investment
under JFM for forest protection and management, and also for non-forest/non-land based livelihood
activities. The community is however still not too clear in what way they would benefit by being
part of the JFM. Their tribe members from other villages are noticing their progress and are also
very keen to replicate their success story, which the village community is sharing with pride and
conviction. Within the village the NaRMG and VC members are deliberating on whether or not to
increase areas under conservation and what benefit that might bring to them both economically
and ecologically.
The greatest constraint is that the people are generally economically weak, but their need for cash
income is growing due to increasing expenditure for education, health care and general household
expenses. Many households are looking at the current conservation effort as the possible source of
economic returns. However, this may not be achieved as much as expected due to various other
constraints such as absence of working scheme for harvesting of timber, among others.

Conclusion
case studies - assam

The community has revived village reserved forest with the assistance of NERCORMP-IFAD
project. They are now also deriving benefits from such conservation efforts. However, efforts need
to be strengthened in certain areas which include:
• Linkages with the FD and other concerned government departments.
• Policy sustainability i.e. the efforts of the community to promote conservation through appropriate
incentives and recognition by the government.
• Institutional sustainability, i.e. the continuity of the NaRMG and strengthening of the VC
particularly in governance and financial matters.
166 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

• Financial sustainability.
• Technological sustainability.
The biodiversity assessment of the area is yet to be done. The village reserved forest has many
varieties of plant and wild animals. Some of the important animals seen in the forest and vicinity
are wild boar, deer, monkeys, fox, squirrels, wild fowl and bear, among others.

This case study has been contributed by Dr. Vincent Darlong of North Eastern Region Community
Resource Management Project for Upland Areas, Mary Hmar of North Cachar Hills Community
Resource Management Society, and Tutumoni Lyngdoh of North Eastern Region Community
Resource Management Project for Upland Areas in June 2007.

For more details contact:

Vincent Darlong
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas [NERCORMP-
IFAD],
“Sympli Building”,
Dhankheti,
Shillong 793 001,
Meghalaya
Ph: 0364-2503531, 2500495
Email: drvtdarlong2002@yahoo.co.in

Mary Hmar
North Cachar Hills Community Resource Management Society [NERCORMP-IFAD],
P.O. Haflong,
N.C. Hills,
Assam.
Ph: 03673-236937
Email: merihmar@yahoo.co.in

Tutumoni Lyngdoh
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas [NERCORMP-
IFAD],
“Sympli Building”,
Dhankheti,
Shillong 793 001,
Meghalaya
Ph: 0364-2503531, 2500495

Endnotes
1
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas (NERCORMP) is a Joint Project
of International Fund for Agriculture (IFAD) and the Government of India, Ministry of Development of North Eastern
Region, North East Council, Shillong, Meghalaya. For more details on the programme, see www.necorps.org.
Bihar
Bihar - an introduction
Location and biogeography
Bihar is located in the eastern part of the country. It is an entirely land–locked state, although
the outlet to the sea through the port of Kolkata is not far away. Bihar lies mid-way between the
humid West Bengal in the east and the sub humid Uttar Pradesh in the west which provides it with
a transitional position in respect of climate, economy and culture. It is bounded by Nepal in the
north and by Jharkhand in the south. The Bihar plains are divided into two unequal halves by the
river Ganga that flows through the middle from west to east. The total geographical area of the
state is 94,164sq km.
Bihar lies in the tropical to sub tropical region. Rainfall here is the most significant factor in
determining the nature of vegetation. Bihar has a monsoon climate with an average annual rainfall
of 1200 mm. Northern Bihar is almost entirely a level tract, while the south is wooded and hilly.
North Bihar is extremely fertile. The Himalayan Mountains in the north have a significant bearing
on the distribution of monsoon rainfall in Bihar. Bihar is watered by numerous rivers like Ganga,
Kosi, Gandak, Burhi Gandak, Kamla-Balan, Baghmati, Kareh, Mahananda, Adhwara, among others.
Steatite, Pyrites, Quartzite, Crude Mica and Limestone are among the major minerals found in the
state.
The topography of Bihar can be easily described as a fertile alluvial plain occupying the Gangetic
Valley. The plain extends from the foothills of the Himalayas in the north to a few miles south of
the River Ganga. Four distinct regions can be recognized in the state, which are: The North Ganga
plains, the alluvial plains of North West, the South Bihar plains and the alluvial filling south of
Ganga.

Biodiversity
The sub Himalayan foothills of Someshwar and Dun ranges in Champaran constitute a belt of
moist deciduous forests. These also consist of scrub, grass and reeds. Here the rainfall is above
1,600 mm which promotes luxuriant sal forests. The hot and dry summer contributes to the
deciduous nature of forests. The most important trees are sal, shisham, toona, khair, and semal.
This type of forest also occurs in Saharasa and Purnia districts. Rich farmland and lush orchards
extend throughout the state.
The notified forest area in the state is about 6473sq km or 6.87%. Of this protected forest is
692.89sq km (10.70%), reserve forest is 5778.89sq km (89.20%) and the rest is non classified
forest. The Gangetic dolphin, leopard, tiger, wild buffalo, four horned antelope, Indian elephant,
swamp deer, hog deer and gaur are some of the important mammals in the state.

Socio-economic profile
The population of state of Bihar according to 2001 census is 82,998,509. Till 1991 Census, the
composite state of Bihar was the second most populous state in the country (containing slightly
more than 10 percent of the country’s population), next only to Uttar Pradesh. However, after
bifurcation of the state of Bihar and creation of the new state of Jharkhand, the rank of Bihar
among the states of India has slipped down to third.
state chapter - bihar

Bihar has a very small tribal population spread largely in the bordering areas of Jharkhand.
The State has a total of 23 scheduled castes as per 2001 census. The major tribes in Bihar are
Santhal, Kharwar, Tharu and Dhangad. The most notable among the schedule castes are bhumij,
chamar (Mochi), dhobi, dom, dusadh, musahar, nat and pasi. The major dialects of Hindi in the
state are: Bhojpuri, Magahi and Maithili. The main occupation of the people is agriculture. Cattle-
rearing is practiced by settled cultivators. The principal food grain crops are rice, wheat, maize and
pulses. Main cash crops are sugarcane, oilseeds, tobacco, jute and potato. 90% of farmers in Bihar
grow rice. Major industries include cotton spinning mills, sugar mills, jute mills, rice mills, woolen
weaving, tussar silk production and leather industries.

169
170 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The state of Bihar is densely populated by agrarian communities exerting ever-growing demands
for agricultural lands. Their needs of fuel wood have been mainly responsible for depletion of
plant cover forest and turning of vast tract of land into waste land. Reclamation of wastelands and
wetlands for human uses has left animal life vulnerable or declining with no end in the sight. There
are 1450 saw mills as legal against 3900 saw mills running illegally in Bihar.
Natural calamities like recurring floods and rivers changing their courses have heavy impacts on
animals, human life and property, and wildlife habitat. Rivers are highly polluted as industries flout
pollution control norms which have severely endangered the floral and faunal biodiversity and the
traditional agriculture practices in their vicinity. Poaching, mismanagement of aquatic resources,
pollution, deforestation and lax management of forest areas are the major issues in Bihar state
related to environment.

Conservation
As part of conservation initiative state forest department manages 12 wildlife sanctuaries,
1 national park (Valmiki National park), 2 tiger reserves (Palamau Tiger Reserve and Valmiki
Tiger Reserve), 1 closed area (Gogabil Pakshi Vihar) and 1 botanical garden. International Bird
Conservation Network (IBCN) facilitated by the Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) and Birdlife
International has identified 11 Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in the state1. Additionally, 11 sites are
proposed to be identified as Ramsar sites as per Ramsar Convention2.
NEAC (National Environmental Awareness Campaign) by the government seems to have generated
an interest in and support to the NGOs in the state. Many individuals like. R.K.Sinha (popularly
known as the Dolphin Man), B.K. Sinha, NGOs like BNHS, SACON (Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology
and Natural History), Mandar Nature Club (MNC), The UNESCO Club of Darbhanga and Society
for Conservation of Flora & Fauna are contributing significantly to various environmental issues
in the state. Army from Danapur cantonment and Paharpur camp are also contributing through
conserving bird habitats and afforestation drives.
Bihar state is blessed with rich traditions and heritage being the land of Buddha, Mahavir, Ashoka
and other Magadh emperors who had been the great conservationists of biodiversity. Till today
many of these conservation traditions and rituals which connect humans to nature exist and are
practiced widely throughout the state. Some efforts by the local communities at conservation have
also been reported. Some such examples are mentioned below but details are not available for
most any except Motichak village in Bhagalpur district.
These efforts towards participatory biodiversity conservation in the state include:

Location
S. no. Name of the area Kind Of effort Area
(District)
Gonda and Rahama
1. North Karnapura Forest protection Not available
villages
22 villages and
2. Hazaribaug Forest protection Not available
Hazaribaug
West Singbhum
3. Uishiya Village Forest protection > 5,000 acres
Sacred Groves of
4. Daltonganj Sacred groves protection Not available
Palamau Tiger Reserve
Protection of greater and Entire village
5 Motichak Bhagalpur
lesser adjutant storks area

This information is compiled by Saili S. Palande based on Bihar profile http://gov.bih.nic.in/

Profile/default.htm and Mishra, A. Draft Report Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan for Bihar,
in the document TPCG and Kalpavriksh. Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report of the
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Prepared by the NBSAP Technical and Policy
Core Group. (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).

Endnotes
1
Source: M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani. Important Bird Areas of India: Priorities of Conservation-IBCN, BNHS, UK:
Bird Life International, 2004.
2
M.Z.Islam and A.R. Rahmani. Potential Ramsar Sites in India. IBCN:BNHS and Birdlife International, 2006.
 CCA/Bihar/CS1/Bhagalpur/Motichak/Adjutant stork breeding site

Motichak, Bhagalpur
Background
At the beginning of the twentieth
century, the greater adjutant
storks were found in huge
numbers, in much of South and
South-East Asia from Pakistan
through northern India, Nepal
and Bangladesh to Myanmar,
Thailand, Laos, Vietnam and
Cambodia. Over the last hundred
years, a massive decline has
taken place and their breeding
population has confined to only
two places in the world one in
Assam in India and the other in Colony of greater adjutant storks at Motichak village Photo: Arvind Mishra
Cambodia. However its foraging population survives mainly in the flood plains of Brahmaputra,
Ganga and Kosi region. Some reports of breeding populations of the greater adjutant had come
from Uttar Pradesh in the year 1865-1868 and from Orissa in 1889-1890 but were not authenticated
as mentioned in the Red Data Book1.
IUCN (the World Conservation Union) has categorized this species as endangered in the year
2002. Its total world population has been estimated to be 700-800. 80% of the breeding population
of this species is found in Assam in India and rest in Cambodia. The authors of this case study
have identified the first ever nesting of greater adjutant in Bihar as the third breeding range of this
species in the world.2
In India nine species of storks are found. Among these, the white stork, oriental stork and black
storks are migratory and the greater adjutant, lesser adjutant, black necked stork, Asian openbill
or openbilled stork, woolly necked stork or white necked stork, and painted stork are resident.
Out of these nine species of storks, seven are seen around Bhagalpur district of Bihar. The
members of Mandar Nature Club (MNC) based in Bhagalpur have found the breeding sites of four
species of these storks in the area i.e. the Asian openbill, black necked stork, lesser adjutant and
the greater adjutant. While the greater adjutant has the status of endangered category, the lesser
adjutant is categorized as vulnerable by the IUCN under the list of threatened birds of Asia. In
Bhagalpur both these species are seen breeding on the same trees. Black necked stork and painted
stork have been categorized by IUCN as nearly threatened species.

Towards community conservation

Both the greater adjutant and the lesser adjutant are known to breed close to human habitation.
Lesser adjutant have been seen breeding on semal, peepal, banyan and mango trees in the state.
In the newly discovered breeding site both of these species seem to be preferring semal trees
located in Motichak village of Bhagalpur district. Locally the storks are called as garud3 and the
greater adjutant as bada garud or hargilla because they have a large neck pouch. The garud have
case studies - bihar

a great mythological importance among the Hindus in India as they are known to be the careers
of lord Vishnu.
Villagers in Motichak village have been traditionally protecting the birds from the nomadic hunter
gatherer tribe, Banpar, locally called the Gulgulwas. There have been reports of the local villagers
snatching the catapult from the banpars and driving them away from the nesting site of these birds.
The villagers had been doing this without the knowledge of the threatened status of these birds.
Once the breeding site was discovered by the MNC members, the villagers were skeptical about
their intentions behind visiting the site. Over a period of time an environment of trust and friendship
171
172 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

developed between the villagers and the MNC members. Through the bird watchers the villagers
became aware about the threatened status of the adjutant species and their zeal to protect these
birds increased. Villagers are now sentimentally attached with the trees on which the birds nest.
Once when a chick of a lesser adjutant died after falling from the tree, even the women and
children came to its rescue. The next morning all women, children and the youth were sad as the
chick did not survive.

Threats to the Greater adjutant

Some of the main threats being faced by these birds include the following:
1. Habitat destruction
2. Hunting by local nomadic, hunter, gatherer tribe called the Banpars, who collect the eggs and
chicks of the birds and hunt them for food and trade.
3. Extensive use of the anti-inflammatory medicine Diclofenac for veterinary purposes (also the
reason for the forced, near extinction of vulture population in India). Greater adjutant often
feed on carcasses of dead livestock and are likely to be decimated like the vultures if Diclofenac
is not banned in the state.
4. Lack of awareness about their threatened status.

Conclusion
More extensive surveys are required at micro levels to find out the exact status of both foraging
and breeding populations of these birds in the state. This species needs to be listed under schedule I
of Wild Life (Protection) Act (under which the threatened species in India are listed and protected).
The forest department needs to take a greater interest in conserving this species along with
the local people. High level of awareness is required to be generated among the rural people
about the status of these birds. Plantation of semal trees close to their nesting sites needs to be
encouraged.

This case study has been contributed by Arvind Mishra, the State Coordinator of Bihar and
Jharkhand for Indian Bird Conservation Network (IBCN) who is also the member State Board
for Wildlife, Govt. of Bihar and member editorial board, Newsletter for Birdwatchers along
with his team of Mandar Nature Club (MNC), Bhagalpur, Jainandan Mandal, D.N. Choudhary,
Sunil Agrawal, Tapan Kumar Pan and Tapan Kumar Ghosh. This case study was contributed in
January 2007.

For more details contact:

Arvind Mishra
Mandar Nature Club
Anand Chikitsalaya Road
Bhagalpur, Bihar – 812002
Ph: 0641 – 2423479,
Mob: 09431875124
E-mail: mncarvind@homail.com and mncarvind@rediffmail.com

Endnotes
1
A database on the endangered species of flora and fauna.
Greater adjutant stork nesting
2
A. Mishra, J. Nandan, Mandal and T. K. Gosh, ‘Breeding of Lesser Adjutant from Photo: Arvind Mishra
an unexplored area of Kosi region of N. Bihar’. Newsletter for Birdwatchers, Vol.
44, No.6, Nov– Dec 2004.
A. Mishra, J. Nandan, Mandal and T. K. Gosh, ‘First ever reporting of the breeding population of lesser adjutant in
Bihar’. Mistnet, Vol. 7, No.1, Jan-Mar, 2006.
3
In this area all the storks in general are referred to as garud, connected to the Hindu mythological epic of Ramayan
in which garud the bird helped lord Ram in his war of goodness over evil.
Chhattisgarh
Conservation, local practices, and innovation:
Natural resource management in Chhattisgarh
Archana Prasad

Author’s note
In this chapter, I look at community conservation practices in the context of a crisis in natural
resource management in the newly formed Chhattisgarh State. Epitomised by the century’s worst
drought,1 this crisis is a reflection of the mismanagement of land, water and forest resources. Neo-
Gandhian and radical left-oriented activists in the region see the centralised control of resources
as the main culprit for the present environmental crisis. Many contend that traditional patterns
of resource use and conservation must be restored if the aim of sustainable development is to be
achieved.2
While this critique of modern conservation practices is valid, it ignores the feudal context in which
traditional conservation systems were embedded. Community conservation in the Chhattisgarh
context cannot be seen merely in terms of oral traditions and prevailing terms of use, but should
be seen mostly in terms of the local community’s ability to utilise their resources sustainably so
as to reap the benefits of that particular resource over extended periods of time. This requires
the adaptation of local skills and knowledge of prevalent situations and the development of new
and innovative decentralised systems of resource management through a confluence of local,
‘indigenous’ and scientific knowledge.
If such programmes are to be effectively implemented, the term ‘community’ should be redefined
in a way that it can include the creation of new collective identities. These identities are not
representative of the ‘traditional culture or identity’ of the local people, but are based on a process
of social engineering that attempts to establish relationships of social equity. This equity has to
be seen in terms of both access to productive resources as well as the distribution of benefits—a
principle not followed by a majority of local institutions currently. It is therefore not possible to see
conservation practices as isolated from their vision of society, economy and polity as a whole. I
argue that social and economic transformations are integral to community conservation initiatives
in the context of the interventions of the Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha, Ekta Parishad, the People’s
Science Movement and the efforts of an empowered women’s group. The efforts of these groups
and movements show that new social identities form the basis of community conservation efforts
with a view to ensuring that the marginalised sections of the population benefit the most from it.

1. Background
1.1. Geographic profile
The state of Chhattisgarh was formed on 1
November 2000 through an Act of Parliament
state chapter - chhattisgarh

entitled ‘Reorganisation of Madhya Pradesh Act’.

It is situated in the east of Madhya Pradesh 17° to
23°7' degree North latitude and 80°04' to 83°38'
East longitude. The total area of the state is 1.35
lakh sq km.
The region is primarily drained by the Mahanadi
River. The average annual rainfall is 60 inches.
Chhattisgarh consists of three natural regions,
rich in minerals, forest produce and fertile alluvial
plains. The first natural formation is the plateau of
Baghelkhand that joins the Jharkhand plateau to
the north. Contiguous to the Gondwana region, it A typical forest landscape in Chhattisgarh
Photo: Madhu Ramnath
stretches from Sarguja District in the north to the
northern parts of Bilaspur District. The region is
175
176 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

drained primarily by the Son river, which separates Chhattisgarh from the rest of Madhya Pradesh.
The area is rich in Kosa silk, Chappa in Bilaspur being the main centre of trade. Large industrial
concerns in the Sarguja area are engaged in mining of coal, bauxite and limestone. The area is
rich in forests, especially mixed forests of sal, mahua, amla, shisham, semul, rohini and palas. The
Kodaku, the Pahadi Korba and the Nagesia are among the tribal groups dependent on seasonal
gathering and cultivation in the region. Around a third of the population migrates to cities in other
states for wage labour after the harvesting season is over.
The second ecological zone consists of the Chhattisgarh Plains in southern Bilaspur, Raipur,
Durg, Rajnandgaon and Raigarh districts. This area forms the Mahanadi basin and was known as
the ‘rice bowl of central India’. The region was particularly rich in indigenous varieties of rice and
water-harvesting methods. The region is rich in iron ore, bauxite, limestone and asbestos, and is
also known for Kosa silk. The region is mostly inhabited by Gonds, Kamars and cultivators like the
Kumbis and Kurmis. A large part of the Bilaspur and Raipur districts that falls in this region was
directly administered by the British till Independence.
The third ecological zone in the region is the Bastar (Dandkaranya) plateau that begins from
Kanker and ends in the Dantewara region in the southernmost part of Bastar district. This region
shares a border with the East Godavari region of Andhra Pradesh and is drained primarily by the
Indravati River. Its main natural wealth consists of forests and minerals. While there is a thin strip
of teak along the Indravati valley and the Keshkal hills, the rest of the forests are of mixed sal
types. Bastar is well-known for minor forest produce such as imli, amla, chironji, mahua, harra,
etc. and also for minerals like mica, manganese, iron ore, bauxite and limestone. Like the northern
part of the state, this region is also considered a proto-type of the composite tribal culture of
Madhya Bharat. It houses Abhujmarh, the abode of the Maria Gonds, and also has a considerable
Kamar and Gond population. It was also one of the oldest Gond feudal states of the region and
because of this, its history has acquired significance for all scholars of central India.

1.2. Socio-economic profiles in the context of development

The state’s population (2001
census) is 20.83 million people,
of which nearly 80 per cent live
in rural areas, and the rest in
urban areas. 31.8 per cent of
the population is composed
of Scheduled Tribes (ST), and
another 11.6 per cent Scheduled
Castes (SC). An overwhelming
majority (about 95 per cent)
is Hindu, with Muslims and
Christians forming about 2 per
cent each, and other religions
very tiny minorities.3
Despite rich and diverse
natural and human resources,
Chhattisgarh has not been able
to develop to its full potential
because relations between the
region (now a newly formed
A tribal market for pots Photo: Madhu Ramnath state) and the rest of Madhya
Pradesh have always been based
on systems of unequal exchange. This is evident in the patterns of industrialisation. Industries like
BALCO, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bharat Aluminium, many cement factories, the sleeper repair factory
of the Indian Railways and several paper mills were opened in the region during the late 1960s
and mid-1970s. Most of these were ancillary industries and hardly produced any finished goods.
Chhattisgarh thus recovered the cost of primary produce and labour without generating additional
employment or income. This meant that the poorest of the poor were either forced into daily-wage
employment or had to migrate in search of jobs outside the region.
Chhattisgarh was considered the rice bowl of the country and rice was the staple food of its
people. The production of paddy is mainly concentrated in Raipur and Bilaspur divisions, with
Raigarh and Durg having the highest yields in the plains of the Mahanadi basin. As far as the
landholding patterns of the region are concerned, production is concentrated in the hands of
 Chhattisgarh 177

big landholders. According to the Indira Gandhi

Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, only 9 per cent of farmers
controlled 70 per cent of all cultivable land in 1987,
while the small and marginal farmers had titles to
only 20 per cent, despite constituting 65 per cent of
the peasantry in the region.
Since primary occupations in the region were
agriculture- and forest-based, most of the rural
landless were only able to get part-time seasonal
employment within the Chhattisgarh region. Large
numbers migrated to other parts of the country. Given
this situation, poverty, unemployment and migration
are some of the main problems of Chhattisgarh
development. According to Hari Thakur, 2135 people Women making leaf cups Photo: Madhu Ramnath
committed suicide in 1994–5, of whom 80 per cent were reported to have killed themselves
because of unemployment and poverty.4 These were among the factors that led to the voicing of
demands for separate statehood for the Chhattisgarh region.
While some of the above factors were important elements that contributed to the poverty of
Chhattisgarh, long-standing mismanagement of natural resources also played a significant role
in the underdevelopment of the region. Despite its rich endowment of land, water and forest
resources, Chhattisgarh has been facing its worst droughts of the century (e.g. in 2000-1). In
Raipur district alone, 1467 of 2,215 villages have been declared as drought-affected, whereas 24
of 42 tehsils face hunger and destitution in Bilaspur. The 2001 village panchayat records state that
400,000 people migrated out of the state even before Diwali and that close to 50 per cent of crops
had dried up and failed.5
Increasing soil erosion and water depletion are evident even in government reservoirs, where
water levels have been reduced to a third of their capacities. Changes in cropping patterns,
forest degradation and the marginalisation of small water harvesting initiatives have resulted in
degeneration of the natural resources base of the state.
The figures of the Madhya Pradesh Human Development Report are revealing and show that most
of the districts of the region are starved of stable irrigation facilities. Almost half the landholdings,
even in primarily paddy-growing regions like Durg and Raipur, are unirrigated and depend on
rains for agriculture. In other forested tribal areas and hilly tracts like Bastar and Sarguja, the
level of forest degradation is shown by sharp increases in the area in open forest tracts and the
corresponding decline in dense forest area even in a short period between 1993 and 1997.6 Given
this situation, the state has been forced to recognise the importance of people’s participation in
natural resource management.

2. A history of administrative control over land and resources

2.1. Communities, conservation and the political system
Chhattisgarh region was ruled by a diversity
of political systems before it became an
integral part of Madhya Pradesh after the
reorganisation of states in the 1950s. The
Bhosale Raja of Nagpur dominated the
region since the early 18th century and was
state chapter - chhattisgarh

followed by British rule since the early 19th

century. The region was the ancient seat of
the Raj Gond dynasties that comprised some
of the most ancient feudatory zamindaris.
The zamindaris of Bastar, Sarguja, Raigarh
Kawardha, Korea and Pandaria were
important centres and survived till the post-
Independence abolition of the system. The
Toddy in the forest Photo: Madhu Ramnath diversity of political systems had a great
impact on the fate of traditional conservation
systems. Since conservation itself involves degrees of political control, the space available for
community control over local resources differed. Recent studies on the nature of the zamindaris
have shown that the prevalence of feudal loyalties accorded some protection to local resource use
systems. Communities were charged with taxes in the form of produce and labour,7 in return for
178 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

which they were accorded rights of movement and management in the forest areas they inhabited.
This meant that conservation practices were in most cases dictated by patterns of subsistence that
could be defined not only in economic but also in social and cultural terms. For instance, there
was a ban on felling mahua and sal trees for timber as their non-timber forest produce formed an
integral part of tribal life in the area. We also find that these trees formed an important part of the
sacred groves and sacred spaces of the area.

Box 1
Sacred Groves and Trees in Chhattisgarh8
Many anthropological studies give an account of the tradition of sacred groves in Chhattisgarh.
Villages in Bastar, for instance, have three kinds of groves, matagudi, devgudi and gaondevi,
the first two managed by families, and the last one belonging to the village as a whole. The
Chhotanagpur part of the state shows the predominance of sarana or jahera kind of groves.
Generally, the area occupied by the sarana is less than an acre. Practices range from absolutely
no extraction of resources to once-a-year extraction to minimal use of non-timber forest
produce.
Chhattisgarh’s sacred groves are said to contain rich biodiversity, which however remains
largely undocumented. Trees that are typically part of such groves include saj, sal, mahua,
pipal, tendu, sag, and semur.
Certain species of trees like banyan, bel, khadsingi, mahua, mango, palas, peepal, and umbar
are culturally and traditionally considered to be sacred and are not cut by local communities.

Tribal habitations were however, quite mobile and the settlement of tribals and poor peasants in
interior forest tracts was a phenomenon observed only in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.
Before that tribal and pastoral people moved between the plains and the highlands and followed an
agro-pastoral mode of livelihood. It was the settlement of caste Hindu cultivators in the mid-17th
century that stopped the seasonal migration of tribal people into the plains and their marginalisation
process gained momentum. This was mainly because the Maratha regime was only interested in
extracting maximum revenue from these lands and therefore facilitated the settlement of these
cultivators. As a result of this tribal people were pushed further and further into the forests and
their survival became more and more precarious because the seasonal balance of their subsistence
systems was disturbed. In this situation the local control over resources did not necessarily mean
that people dependent on the forest eco-system were able to meet their subsistence needs
properly.9 This trend was further accentuated in colonial times. Areas that were directly annexed
by the British witnessed drastic modifications of local resource use patterns. The formation of
the forest department in 1865 and the reservation of forests that began in 1878 resulted in a
great loss of subsistence resources in tribal and poor peasant societies. It also resulted in forceful
exploitation of tribal forest dwellers as labourers, often followed by the migration of tribals from
the state-owned forests into zamindari forests.
The British then attempted to shift control over the forests of the zamindari areas through their
Residents to the rajas. This created a lot of political and social tension in the forested zamindaris
because forest-dwellers expected that rajas and zamindars would grant them more rights than
the alien British rulers. This is evident from the fact that many more protests are recorded in
zamindari areas than in the state-owned territories of the erstwhile Central Provinces. Some of
the more significant of these protests were the Bastar Maria rebellion of 1910 and the Sarguja
Nagesia rebellion of 1929. Most of these rebellions
were for reduction in taxes on land settlements,
forest rights and against the operation of the banias
(money-lenders) and other outsiders. In many cases
tribal leaders thought that the zamindars and rajas
were not able to protect the rights of the people on
their own resources and had therefore violated their
customary duties towards them.
After the abolition of the zamindaris in the 1950s,
feudal states became a part of independent India.
British systems of conservation and control over
resources were followed throughout the country.
Local people celebrating a festive occassion Photo: Customary rights that had been retrieved through
Madhu Ramnath the rebellions of the pre-Independence era were once
 Chhattisgarh 179

again violated, leading to widespread protests in the erstwhile feudatory states. However the post-
Independence era also witnessed a different trend of rebellion in that the question of rights was
integrally linked to the redistribution and improvement of land. These rebellions were different
because the confrontation was not only with the landholder but also with the state machinery
of independent India. In Chhattisgarh a good example of this trend is the movement started by
a forgotten freedom fighter, Sukhlal Nage. As a leader of the tribals, Nage inspired the landless
tribals of Koremuda in Siwaha of present-day Dhamtari district to reclaim 1,881 acres of cultivable
wasteland for traditional cooperative farming in the 1950s. Two years after successfully farming the
area, the movement was broken by police action, and Nage himself was killed in custody.10 Similar
protests for customary forest and land rights were witnessed in Bastar in 1966. Organisations like
the Bharat Jan Andolan, Ekta Parishad, Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha and others have fought for
customary rights of local inhabitants (some of these cases are considered in greater detail later).
These movements were to influence community conservation trends in later years.
Pressures on traditional systems also led to changes in traditional patterns of conservation. By
the mid-1980s and early 1990s, community participation became a buzzword in the officialdom
of the state of Madhya Pradesh, and was accompanied by the passing of the rules of Joint Forest
Management, the setting up of Rajiv Gandhi Watershed and Drinking Water Missions, enactment
of the Panchayat Raj Act and the formation of district governments,11 aimed at rectifying resource
degradation through the involvement of people and attempting to reverse the trend of centralised
resource control. While many of these initiatives have provided opportunities for movements to
experiment with community conservation, they have also resulted in an effort to appease popular
demands for genuine decentralisation.
These measures are, however, proving too late and too little for two reasons. First, the nature
and scale of resource degradation is such that a single community or NGO cannot harness the
investment and technical expertise required for restoration. Second, prolonged centralised
management systems have led to the marginalisation of local and regional institutions that can
have a positive impact on resource utilisation and control. The interface between natural resource
management regimes and structures of governance has assumed great importance today. The
foregoing discussions show how the use of official mechanisms for community conservation has to
be accompanied by aggressive mobilisation and social engineering if local needs are to be met in
an equitable manner.

Box 2
Appropriation of Natural Resources12
Chhattisgarh has had a long history of land appropriation by Maratha invaders, the British
and the non-tribal communities from other parts of the country. Exploitation of forests started
in the 19th century and from the 1860s onwards the British Government started exploiting
commercially valuable sal forests through leases to various private companies. Reservation
of forests began in 1891 when the erstwhile Central Province (of which Chhattisgarh was a
part) came under direct British administration. Reservation included three major categories of
forests: reserved forests (no rights of local people allowed), Protected Forests (some access
allowed to the people), and Nistari Forests (meant for meeting bonafide domestic needs of
the people). Non-Timber Forest Produce (NTFP), on which a majority of the population was
dependent (for personal use and sale) was made a state subject with leases given to powerful
contractors, reducing local people to mere collectors who had no option but to sell to these
contractors. This led to the breakdown of traditional systems of NTFP trade, e.g., with local
artisans and the Banjara (migratory) community. The new forest policy with more area under
state chapter - chhattisgarh

reservation, NTFP policy and imposition of grazing fee led to a major rebellion in 1910. This
was perhaps the last time a popular action was led by the majhis (traditional system of local
leadership) and the representatives of the traditional tribal regime. Thanks to this and a series
of other rebellions, the subsequent forest policies in Bastar were not as intrusive as in rest of
the country. However, these forests were too valuable to leave unexploited, particularly during
the two World Wars.
The situation did not improve after independence, with India’s commercial /industrial needs
replacing colonial needs as major policy determinants (Gadgil and Guha 1992). In addition,
in the 1960s local biodiversity and livelihoods were severely impacted by the replacement of
indigenous forests with monocultures of commercially important exotic species, encouraged
by agencies such as the World Bank. Between 1956 and 1981, 1,25,483 ha of forest land in
Bastar was transferred to development projects, accounting for one third of the total forest loss
in the district.13 Prior to that, in 1949 the Nistar forests were converted to Protected Forests.
180 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

This led to further complexities for the local tribals, as without proper land surveys and clear
statement of jurisdiction over these forests, many long-term cultivators are today considered
encroachers. Encroachments are a serious problem, carried out both by the landless in the
absence of any other alternatives, and by the politically powerful for financial gains (in the
period 1976–80, 32.5 sq km out of 11,600 sq. km. of forests in Jagdalpur District were under
encroachment).
Bastar has been shrouded with scams involving a nexus of politicians, forest contractors and
government officials (often exposed by sensitive government officials and social activists).
The most well-known of these is the Malik Makbuja scam, which involved misuse of rights
given to peasants to cut trees on their own lands. The scheme was exploited by the nexus by
encouraging peasants to cut the maximum number of trees at abysmally low prices. Timber
was also extracted from the government forests using Malik Makbuja as a front. MP Protection
of Scheduled Tribes (Interest in Trees) Act, 1956, was aimed at ensuring that the tribals are
not cheated under this scheme; however, this was not of much use and was subverted by
timber merchants and the powers-that-be. In 1992, thanks to the efforts of movements like
Ekta Parishad, the Supreme Court banned all felling in Bastar. Whether this has really benefited
the tribals and the biodiversity of Bastar is yet to be seen.

Box 3
People’s Protected Areas14
The People’s Protected Area (PPA) Initiative, launched by the State
forest department in 2002, is expected to be implemented by the
people with the philosophy of achieving sustainable livelihood
through biodiversity conservation following the ecosystem
approach. The FD expects this programme to be different from the
existing ecodevelopment programme and Joint Forest Management
(JFM). They see ecodevelopment as an exclusionary process aimed
at providing alternative sources of livelihoods, thus alienating
the communities from their resources. JFM is seen more as a FD
programme in which local people participate. PPA is supposed to
derive legal support from the Indian Forest Act, 1927, though it is
not very clear from the documents how this is so. So far 32 PPAs
have been established, extending over 500,000 ha and covering
more than 300 villages. The Dugli-Jabarra PPA in Dhamtari Division
includes 15 villages with a population of 5,742.
The total catchment area under the project is 37,774 ha of sal
and miscellaneous forests. While 20,269 ha is reserved for
conservation, 17,505 ha have been allocated to meet people’s
nistar needs. Various initiatives taken up to enhance livelihood
options and improve biological diversity include forest protection
through village forest protection committees, developing nurseries
and plantations of suitable indigenous species, reducing grazing
pressures in sensitive areas, non-destructive harvesting of
medicinal plants, raw material processing, value addition, effective
marketing, etc.

3. Origins of community conservation initiatives

Chhattisgarh serves as a good example of people’s participation in the management of their
resources, but in a non-conventional sense. When examined in a purely scholarly context, it may
appear that Chhattisgarh has no community conservation practices at all, because the state is
a land of migrants who have continuously influenced and developed each other’s resource use
patterns and knowledge base. Erratic movements of people from hilly regions to the plains were
indicative of this, and were often conditioned by political conflict (see Prasad 1999).
The Gonds can be considered the first migrants into Chhattisgarh. They fled from the kingdom
of Deogarh (present-day Chhindwara district, MP) and arrived in the rice bowl of Madhya Bharat
in the early Maratha period in approximately the early 14th century when the Gonds and the
Gowalees had their kingdom in the area. Farmer communities like the Kurmis, Lodhis and Kumbis
were settled in the area by successive Maratha regimes to exploit the optimal revenue potential
 Chhattisgarh 181

of the region. The continuous influx of people into the area led to changes in practices of resource
use at frequent intervals.
It is thus difficult to define local practices of communities specific to any area of the state before
the late 18th century. For example, early Maratha records clearly indicate that many of the Gond
people (of which the Marias form an integral part) of Chhattisgarh practised rice cultivation in the
plains and had bullocks in the period before 1747. It was also indicated that many of them may
have given up the plough for gathering of forest produce and doing shifting cultivation on forested
tracts after military invasions drove them to settle in highland forested areas. The projection
of any of these practices as either ancient or eco-friendly may thus be out of place. Each of
these community practices needs to be evaluated separately from the prism of regeneration and
preservation of local habitats.
In this context, we explore four different community initiatives that involve (i) the preservation
of agricultural diversity, (ii) watershed management, (iii) community mobilization for forest rights,
and (iv) forest conservation. The first three case studies are based on people’s movements and
social engineering as critical precepts in community efforts, but are, interestingly, quite distinct
in the philosophies that drive them. It must be noted that these are not typical NGO or CBO
organisational forms. Rather, they are forms of social and political mobilisation in the struggle
for people’s rights. These struggles are combined with ideas of change and any success that they
get in their campaign and constructive work is a result of their organisational base at the level of
the village or even hamlet. People who identify themselves as part of these movements are also
part of the ‘community’ because they belong there. In this sense these movements are CBOs, but
with a perspective that encompasses a vision not only for the community but the entire society.
Their efforts at the regeneration of resources are born out of this vision and are part of their larger
community-based work. Further communities are seen not as static entities but as evolving, and
these mass movements try to influence the nature of this transformation by organising the most
marginalised section of the people. The fourth case study is a remarkable story of a woman’s
efforts to empower other women and derive benefits for the entire village community.

Box 4
Local Forest Management Practices15
In Bastar cosmology, villages were founded on the basis of land given to the founding member
by the Earth, which had therefore to be propitiated at all agricultural festivals. The Earth includes
the spirits of the river, the forest and the mountain, to each of whom separate offerings are
made. Although the appropriation and reservation of forests by the forest department meant
that forests were officially taken out of village boundaries, they often continued to be part
of the village for ritual purposes. There has continued to be a strong tradition of managing
the forests within one’s village boundaries till quite recently, involving a system of charging
residents of other villages a small fee—known variously as devsari, dand, man or saribodi—in
exchange for the use of one’s forest. In some villages in north Bastar, the fee was charged
according to the amount of timber taken, and usually took the form of some liquor or meat.
Some villages charged only for good timber and not for dry or fallen wood, and others only
if the wood was stolen. Similarly, in some villages, they expected man for grazing, while
others allowed grazing free. In south Bastar, villages which used the forest of another village
made collective contributions to the Earth of
that village at festival times. This was not
necessarily a system of forest protection
as it is understood today, but managed to
state chapter - chhattisgarh

regulate excessive felling and enabled a

supervisory eye on what was happening.
Inevitably, there are cases where it did
not work. The residents of Chitrakote, for
example, complained that while paying
this fee or offering, other villages had
cleaned out their forests, and now they in
turn had to pay another village to use its
forests. However, by and large, it seems to
have been fairly successful. In some cases,
villagers contributed to engaging watchmen.
Two examples are available from the villages
surrounding the Ulnar and Junawani forests
(see the Chhattisgarh case studies). Fallow land Photo: Madhu Ramnath
182 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Often different kinds of management systems are layered upon each other—‘traditional’,
NGO-initiated and forest department-initiated. ‘Traditionally’ villages in Kanker (formerly
North Bastar) would cut timber from each other’s forests in return for Rs 2–4 as devsari.
Around 1985–6, under the influence of Parivartan (Ekta Parishad), the village of Salebhata
and the neighbouring villages of Peedapal, Mandri and Kingapati in Kanker all began protecting
their own nistari forests. Since protection began, no timber cutting from each other’s forests
was allowed, and the giving of devsari stopped. Protection took the form of all-male patrols.
Internally timber was supplied on application. Sunsequently, a government FPC was formed
in Salebhata and they were given a patch of protected forest to protect, which is somewhat
further away from the village, beyond the nistari jungle. In practice, however, the village was
already protecting both the nistari and protected forests. While Salebhata got nothing for
its protection, Mandri village got funds to build a stop-dam, well and pond, as well as wages
for plantation work. The effect of such differential funding for something that both villages
were doing anyway, and its consequences for ‘social capital’ and trust between the villages,
should be fairly obvious. In those cases where women were active in protection, the setting
up of a formal VSS invariably transfers responsibility and authority to males in the village. For
instance, in Belgaon, Korkotti, Bade Khauli and some other villages in Kanker, Mahila Mandals
(women’s groups) formed by Parivartan started protecting their forests a couple of years ago.
The main obstacle was men from their own and neighbouring villages, who were trying to steal
wood. In 1999, a formal VSS under JFM was started in Belgaon and a man was appointed as
chair. Conversations with the Mahila Mandal in December 1999 revealed strong resentment
against this formal committee and its chair. At the initial meeting, everyone was invited and
their signatures were taken but they were told nothing. The VSS had received money to trade
in tamarind and urea, but no one except a few office-bearers knew what was going on. The
women’s’ major complaint was that the Patel or the headman took money on behalf of the VSS
for allowing people from other villages to cut trees from their forest, kept it for himself and did
not tell them about it. When they tried to stop offenders, they would be told that money had
already been paid, and could do nothing.
Where villagers have been organised enough, they have been able to resist the imposition of
a formal scheme. For example, in Chanagaon (Nagari, Raipur district), the villagers have been
mobilised by the Bharat Jan Andolan and are fully aware of their rights to manage their forests
under the Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act (PESA). About 25–30 years ago,
when the nistari forests were converted into protected forests and the FD started exploiting the
forests, the earlier practice of asking the headman for timber ceased and everyone cut freely.
Once the village became organised through the Bharat Jan Andolan (1994–5), they resumed
their earlier system. An FD proposal to start a JFM programme was rejected on the grounds
that the 30 per cent being offered by the FD was too low, and that the JFM rules made no
provision for timber for domestic use.
To summarise, all over this belt, ‘traditional’ forest management rested on the recognition of
village boundaries in forests and the need to make offerings to the forest gods for the use of the
forest. In many places, the villagers trace deforestation to FD felling in coupes. Apart from (falsely)
blaming villages for deforestation, even within the reversed and so-called participatory framework
of JFM, there has been no effort to institutionalize existing cultural systems of management. In
some cases, VSSs have been superimposed on existing community management systems. With
the coming of forest department sanctions and money, villagers’ own contributions have ceased,
as well as the control which flowed from this. Equally problematic is the neglect of traditional
boundaries in apportioning forest land for protection. For example, part of Darbha’s forests have
been given to Chindawara village to protect.

3.1. Natural wealth, local people and the Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha
Movement
3.1.1. Niyogi and early efforts at conservation
The Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha began work in the late 1980s by organising the workers of the
mines of Durg district and the employees of the Bhilai Steel Plant (Bhilai, Chhattisgarh). In an
essay titled ‘Hamara Paryavaran’, Shankar Guha Niyogi, the founder of CMM and an eminent
trade unionist with strong leftist leanings, highlighted the need for recognising the importance of
development and conservation as two parts of the same coin:
“Nowadays people are making environment an obsession and using environmental conservation as
an excuse to oppose industry-based development … But the truth is that we will have to protect our
 Chhattisgarh 183

nature, we will also have to protect our earth. Forests,

trees, plants, clean drinking water, pure air, animals,
birds, humans—all these constitute our world. We will
have to use our compassionate reasoning to develop
flexible programmes on the basis of which the balance
between nature and science can be maintained.”16
Niyogi believed this was only possible if people were
organised to better understand the value of their
own resources. Open access to resources to meet
their basic needs was critical. The CMM believed that
people’s traditional knowledge base and participatory
local planning could form the basis of eco-friendly
and sustainable development. The CMM analysis was
that the indifference of the local population towards
the trees that grew in their area resulted from the
lack of control and stake of the local people in the
management of their plantations. In this context,
Niyogi noted that 60 per cent of the trees in official
plantations were destroyed because of the lack of
local community participation. He also held that the
nexus between forest department and the contractors
was very strong. Contracts for the felling of wood
were granted in the name of afforestation. Other
malpractices recorded by the CMM were the false
Climbing a sal tree for resin Photo: Madhu Ramnath
reporting of the plants that were meant to exist on
government lands and the non-reporting of deaths of saplings that occurred because of neglect.
Having noted the indifference of local people to their own environment, Niyogi and the CMM
began a campaign in Daundi and Rajhara for the revival of people’s knowledge systems, called
Apne Jangal Ko Pehchano, Apne Parivar Ko Pehchano (know your forest, know your family) in the
late 1980s. Through this programme the CMM initiated a process of introducing people to different
plant species growing in their own area, by dividing them into indigenous species, economically
useful ones and those that needed to be regenerated or protected. Their campaign concentrated on
afforestation through the organisation of local communities, believing that enhancing and utilising
local knowledge was the best form of conservation. Their resultant plans were a mix of local and
regional needs. Their studies had revealed that 15 per cent of the total area under government
plantations was covered with bamboos and shrubs and 35 per cent with trees of local species,
while 25 per cent had economically valuable species. The campaign labelled every tree, displaying
information of its variety, uses and the means of sustainable use. In the process, local people
were re-acquainted with their own environment and recognised the importance of making rules to
protect their forests. The campaign was conducted mostly in wastelands and depended on locally
collected funds. This helped in mobilising the local community to begin looking at the possibility of
managing their own resources.17
Taking off from the Apne Jangal Ko Pehchano programme, the CMM began intervening in other
forms of resource management, and facilitated the setting up of 12 hand-pumps and tubewells
at Dalli Rajhara. CMM activists noted that the Gonds had good knowledge of drainage systems
and built their dwellings along natural waterbodies. The CMM opposed the pollution of these
water bodies by protesting against the setting up of the Dalli crushing plant and made a plan for
alternative resource use by helping the people mobilise resources by actively helping people build
state chapter - chhattisgarh

on their own knowledge base.

3.1.2. The protection of agricultural diversity: The next phase

Niyogi’s philosophy and the CMM’s early efforts showed that successful people’s participation in
sustainable natural resource use was based on protests against the abuse of natural resources by
government and big industry and the simultaneous development of alternative systems that revived
and built upon people’s knowledge bases. This strategy gained prominence with the extension of
CMM’s work in natural resource management in the early 1990s. The formation of Rupantar, an
NGO whose leadership was composed of members of the CMM, helped by creating mechanisms for
the documentation of local knowledge, especially in the field of agricultural and forest diversity.
The main focus of both Rupantar and the CMM was on advocacy and documentation of indigenous
rice varieties in the region.
184 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

CMM activists working in the area noticed that paddy yields had been declining in recent years
with increased use of chemical fertilisers and HYV seeds (like IR36) that were promoted by the
Manila-based International Rice Research Institute. These seeds required transplantation and
consequently led to the marginalisation of traditional rice cultivation practices.18
Gond and other tribal peasantry suffered most. These communities were adept at growing
different varieties of paddy by broadcasting. In lowlands under the biyasi broadcasting method,
farmers kept the seeds ready for sowing just before the onset of the June rains. After the seeds
germinated (a little over five weeks) and water had reached the height of the seedlings, the fields
were ploughed (around July-August) and guarded till ready for harvesting.19
Under the penda system of cultivation, the Marias of Abhujmarh converted strips of forest into
cultivable land by burning just before the rains.20 They then spread the ashes on the ground and
waited for the rains to come before they broadcast paddy seeds. The Marias shifted their fields
every two or three years, returning to the same field only after the forest had regenerated (a gap
of 13–14 years). Grigson and Bloomfield’s early studies of shifting cultivation reveal that it was
a rainfed system, having little or no water harvesting principles and completely dependent on
the one crop that it grew. According to Bloomfield, it could barely feed more than 2 persons in a
family in the Baiga area. In the Maria highlands too this would be the case. It appears that this is
not a very old system but has evolved out of the marginalisation of tribals into forested areas in
this region, and is a more precarious and adapted form of the seasonal agro-pastoral system of
survival in this region. The history of the tribal survival patterns shows that there is nothing known
as an ancient system of survival—they are all evolving structures, and in some cases the tribals
benefit and in the other cases not. Clearly in the case of shifting cultivation they did not, as they
were not able to meet even their bare needs.
Nagesia communities grew paddy along with other crops in the bahra or the lowest portions of
the uplands that retained moisture throughout the year. They propagated the rice seed only on
these lands and nowhere else. In the midland (chanwar), paddy could only be grown once the
monsoons came, but did not have the capacity of retaining moisture throughout the year. Less
water-demanding crops could be grown in these areas.21 In the uplands or danrh lands, paddy
could not be grown at all. William Ekka (1986) points out that these were all good lands with
ownership restricted to a limited elite, leading to a differentiation between those Nagesia who
could grow paddy and those who could not. Nagesia who could not grow paddy, preferred bari
or garden lands where vegetables could be grown and khair or sandy lands below the hills where
kodon or kutki that required lesser amount of water could be grown throughout the year. These
diverse systems were harbingers of agricultural diversity.
During his tenure as the Director of the Madhya Pradesh Rice Research Institute, Dr. Richharia
documented 20,000 indigenous varieties of rice. He also demonstrated methods by which indigenous
techniques could be improved to increase yields from local rice varieties by cloning. He said that
this was possible by making changes in the local biyasi system, if the farmers were taught how
to split the tillers of the rice at a vegetative phase even in the broadcasting method. These tillers
could then be transplanted in the spaces between the older transplants, increasing the productivity
of rice by as much as 10 to 15 per cent per hectare. Seeds propagated by this method were less
prone to pests and required minimum threshing. Productivity could be increased to one and a half
times the normal, especially when accompanied by composting.22
The CMM and Rupantar experimented with his techniques with the participation of smallholding
farmers of some panchayats in the Durg and Dhamtari districts. The CMM published a pamphlet
based on the work of Dr. Richharia, to inform farmers of the advantages of clone propagation.
While the work of the CMM is concentrated in southern
Rajhara and Dondi Panchayat areas of southern Durg,
Rupantar concentrates on the adjoining Nagri Siwaha
region of present-day Dhamtari district.
The CMM, which has been contesting the elections as a
political party since the 1980s, has some of the panchayats
under its control. It uses this formal structure to implement
Dr. Richharia’s ideas on indigenous rice cultivation and to
create traditional structures for watershed management.
In the Dondi, Mohalla, Chikla Kasa, Kusum Kasa and
Purur panchayats of the Dondi Block, they advocate
the repair of traditional water harvesting structures and
equitable distribution of access and benefits. Through the Community elders Photo: Madhu Ramnath
panchayats, the CMM also continues to fight for the rights
of the small farmers.
 Chhattisgarh 185

Rupantar set its sights on setting up seed banks for indigenous rice varieties. It first collected and
propagated 270 varieties of indigenous rice species in the Nagri-Siwaha Blocks in 1992–3. It then
transplanted these varieties in plant-cum-seed multiplication centres in the Nagri-Siwaha area.23
Emphasis was placed on varieties that required little water in a region that has frequent monsoon
failures. The work of seed multiplication is being implemented through women’s self-help groups
(SHGs) to encourage self-reliance.

3.1.3. Constraints and opportunities for the initiative

The practical experience of the CMM and Rupantar is very new and needs to be followed up
systematically if the long-term impact of their efforts is to be known. Their attempts highlight the
fact that community control over their own resources can only benefit people if it encompasses
the synthesis between new and old knowledge systems. The use of Constitutional institutions to
promote the conservation of biodiversity also requires social engineering and political mobilisation,
something that Niyogi attempted to do in his lifetime.

3.2. Community watershed interventions and the Chhattisgarh

Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti (BGVS)
3.2.1. From literacy to watersheds: The initial phase
The Chhattisgarh Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti, as part of its aim to use use modern science for
development of the disadvantaged, has taken up implementation of the Rajiv Gandhi Watershed
Mission in five areas of the Bilaspur Division. This was with the purpose of improving agricultural
productivity of about 12,00,000 ha of land, creating employment and recharging ground water
levels. Their Mission Document stated that participatory watershed management approaches
would be followed, whereby the local people would be made direct or indirect stakeholders in
implementation (through NGOs and CBOs).24
The BGVS sought to make small farmers, landless labourers and women leading actors in
implementation. This was done through a series of dialogues about the importance of watershed
regeneration and management, agricultural production, and other matters of importance to the
villagers. Participatory mapping was also used as an effective tool.25
Two specific examples will illustrate the approach used.26
Community involvement at Jagdalli village
Situated on the foothills of a high ridge, Jagdalli commands a watershed area of 26 sq km. The
people’s watershed management initiatives in the form of earthen structures on the ridge and in
their fields were often destroyed by the monsoons for lack of protective vegetation. Gond peasants
survived on the low-yielding and drought-resistant kodon and kutki crops.
Unlike the official machinery, the BGVS wanted to ensure that the watershed committees would
benefit the poorest of the poor. Keeping this in mind, the BGVS volunteers encouraged villagers
to categorise people according to landholdings, and facilitated proportional representation in the
committees. Since the largest proportion of the population consisted of landless labourers and
small farmers, they formed a majority in the committee. Women began forming self-help groups
and also found representation in the watershed committees.
The committees went from house to house to assess water requirements for both irrigation and
state chapter - chhattisgarh

personal needs. With participation of the villagers, the committees mapped distribution patterns
of water collection. The committees helped to resolve inter- and intra-village conflicts by creating
rules for water use (See Case Studies).
Community involvement in Chamanpur
In the preliminary phase, the entire watershed area comprising 29 villages was surveyed with
local villagers. Existing water harvesting structures were mapped and detailed surveys conducted
prior to construction of new structures. User groups were formed, each group representing an
area fed by a single water harvesting structure. Each user group was represented in the watershed
committee of the village. Since most of the area was earlier forested and comprised of the Kodaku,
Korba and Gond tribals, the committees also have a majority tribal representation.
Local land classification systems divided the watershed into three land use categories: bahra
or lowlands, where rice could be grown and which remained moist throughout the year; chawar
or midlands, which had seasonal water shortages and where both rice and wheat could be grown
186 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

seasonally; and darh or highlands, where

only trees and some vegetables could be
grown. The interventions were carried out
keeping the different needs of these lands
in mind.
In Bairupura, Kodaku farmers were
encouraged to practice communal
agriculture, even though individuals
held ownership titles. Tribals worked on
each other’s lands and gave a portion
of their produce to the village treasury.
This accumulated produce was stored for
times of trouble. As another institutional
innovation, the village treasury also acted
as a bank or moneylender. Since the
borrowers were also beneficiaries from
the treasury, the villagers could enjoy the
same benefits as others, as long as they
repaid their loans in easy instalments.27
(see case studies).
Traditional gourd and seed conservation Photo: Madhu Ramnath

3.2.2. Impacts of community interventions on habitat restoration and resource

development
In Jagdalli, irrigated and total cultivable land increased by 20 per cent between 1996–7 and
2000. This was accompanied by an increase in productivity by 20 per cent for previously irrigated
lands and 100 per cent for unirrigated lands. Changes were more dramatic in Chamanpur, where
the 35 acres of irrigated land in the pre-Mission era increased to 40 acres in the first year of
the watershed, to 100 acres by the third year and to 235 acres in the fourth year (the end of
2000). Rates of migration were reduced drastically, as 7 million persondays of employment were
generated by BVGS activities in four years.
These developments would not have been possible without successful recharging of groundwater
levels and sustainable water conservation practices. Wells have started retaining water in summer,
and in Chamanpur the natural nala (stream) has been regenerated. In a neighbouring village,
Bhudupani, a pond that had no water for the last thirty years was now regenerated with potable
water.
Project activities have thus naturally had an impact on the vegetation of the region. In Jagdalli,
the once-bare ridge has regenerated naturally. Outside Chamanpur village, 25 hectares of sal
forest has regenerated. Locally useful and traditional species like tendu, amla, behra and harra
were also grown as a part of the watershed mission.

3.2.3. Constraints and opportunities faced by the initiative

The basic challenge of implementation lay in making the programme different from government-
run watershed programmes. Among the main problems faced, was the delay in transfer of funds
from the government departments. Despite this, work progressed because the community was
mobilised and oriented towards the project. This is in sharp contrast to government-run watershed
programmes, where work stops when funds stop.
Activists and the villagers identify a second problem in conflicts that arose between watershed
committees and gram panchayats, especially where the sarpanch represented a dominant caste
and where dalit and tribal peoples were left out of decision-making processes. Chamanpur initially
faced this situation, but once a majority of the people started supporting the project, the panchayats
themselves became sensitised and more supportive of the programme.

3.3. Protest and conservation: Ekta Parishad and the question of

rights
3.3.1. From rights to conservation
The Ekta Parishad, established in 1990 under the leadership of P.V. Rajagopal, considers itself
 Chhattisgarh 187

a social movement with Gandhian perspectives. The Parishad firmly believes that the village
community has an inalienable right to forest and land resources, and that if villages are reorganised
on traditional patterns, the conservation of wildlife, land and forests will automatically
occur. It sees the struggle for the establishment of local rights as an inseparable part of
community conservation efforts.
The Ekta Parishad is in sharp contrast with the other two movements explored
in this chapter, mainly because of elements of re-creation of tradition and
anti-modernism as essential parts of their ideology. This is especially
emphasised in the context of the exclusion of traditional rights in national
parks and sanctuaries. As a senior activist from Chhattisgarh put it
in conversation with the author: “Vested interests have created
unreal contradictions between human rights and wildlife rights,
and between tribals and tigers. The real contradiction is between
two worldviews: a tribal view based on survival, life, regeneration
and conservation, and a modern view based on exploitation,
consumption, surplus and profit. It is imperative to accept the tribal
view to save the forests and this world.”
This view is reflected by many of the people who are involved with the Parishad. For example,
a Baiga in the Majhura village of the Achanakmar Sanctuary told me on a recent trip that the
traditional taboos and rules of conservation were only applicable with limited population pressures
and interference by conventional conservation systems. Whole traditional systems went awry as
biotic pressures on forests increased and lands available for the collection of forest produce became
more and more restricted.

3.3.2. Institutional mechanisms in community conservation in the Achanakmar Wildlife

Sanctuary28
In Achanakmar WLS, in the Lormi Block of Bilaspur district, the Parishad has worked in 42
villages within the sanctuary and its buffer zone. They have attempted to re-create traditional
structures of the Baiga tribe. Under this structure, villages have a gram sabha consisting of all
the villagers, who elect one male and one female mukhiya in each village. Most of these villages
traditionally do not have gram sabhas—mukhiyas are the customary heads of Baiga society as
it has evolved over time. The Parishad has facilitated this traditional system of governance and
insisted on elections every year. The mukhiyas are employed by the Parishad and are in charge
of building the movement in their villages. They keep in touch with mukhiyas in neighbouring
villages, exchanging information and holding regular meetings with them.
The mukhiyas enforce community rules for resource use as and when required. The rules
are informal and depend on prevailing situations. In the Achanakmar area, people of Parishad-
dominated villages do not entertain cutting or burning of any trees within their areas of influence.
Some rules involving specific resources are also implemented: for instance, the branches of the
amla trees are not to be cut and its fruits can only be picked in a particular season.

3.3.3. Constraints and opportunities faced by the initiative

Inter-village organisations of panchayats consisting of all the mukhiyas of villages in the area,
usually organised on a specific issue, are common. Five villages near Bijra (in the proposed buffer
zone of the sanctuary) held a jungle panchayat around the end of December 1999 in order to
state chapter - chhattisgarh

discuss situations arising from the plantation of trees by the forest department on farmlands. The
forest department had declared these out of bounds for cultivation, but the villagers continued to
cultivate these tracts at the instigation of the Parishad. Thus the people decided that they would
uproot all such trees and refuse to move from the lands of their birth. This decision followed
from the Parishad’s organisation of protest against the relocation of villages from the sanctuary,
reportedly now proposed to become a national park.
The Baiga rehabilitation programme run by the Parishad has so far rehabilitated two villages,
Sarsoha and Ekta ki Purti, from within the confines of the sanctuary. The villagers originally lived
within the confines of the sanctuary but the Ekta Parishad decided to resettle them as a mark of
protest against the regulations imposed on people by the forest department. The organisation
began work involving land reforms and forest protection by ensuring that rules set by gram sabhas
and the mukhiyas are followed. In this way Ekta Parishad and its partner organizations attempt to
combine constructive work with the fight for rights.
188 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The major challenge to this initiative lies in ensuring organisational sustainability among village
communities and institutions once external interventions by the Parishad stops.

3.4. The Karaundamuda Village Forest Committee

Karaundamuda village in Sarguja District is an example of community-led regeneration
and protection of forests (See Case Studies).29 In the 1980s, forests had started to be cut by
contractors from outside. The women of the village then came forward, forming a village forest
protection committee (VFPC) and symbolically tying rakhis to the trees.30 Certain rules were made
for protection:
• Both men and women were required to police the forests.
• Villagers were banned from cutting any trees or their branches in the first year.
• Punishments were accorded to offenders, the nature and size of the offence determining the
type of punishment. For instance, someone caught cutting green wood for fuel was fined Rs 100,
which went to a Village Development Fund run by the Committee.
• At one time, only two cattle per household were allowed to graze in the forest during the
daytime.31 Surplus grass from the forest areas was cut and sold to those who owned more than
two heads of cattle.
The women decided against selling regenerated seeds and seedlings in favour of permitting
natural regeneration of the forests. They also decided to plant traditional resource-use species like
tendu, amla, mahua, and sanjha.32
Within two years, the system of regulated extraction resulted in increased income from forest-
based produce, which was in turn used to install a tubewell for the use of villagers. In 1994
the VFPC received legal recognition as a van suraksha samiti (VSS) from the forest department
under the Joint Forest Management programme. In this process, it suffered one setback: a forest
guard replaced Rajmanbai (who was instrumental in initiating the effort) as the secretary of the
committee. Due to the rules of the JFM programme, women members of the VSS were no longer in
control of funds.33 This was partly a result of the committee’s involvement with Sangata, an NGO;
the NGO however also helped with improved livelihood prospects.
Karaundamuda received the forest department’s award for being the best VSS in the district. The
initiative was then replicated in Ganeshpura, a neighbouring village, in 1997 with active participation
of the women of Karaundamuda on a 220-hectare afforestation programme. A number of livelihood
programmes have been started in both villages. The greatest challenge faced by this initiative is to
identify a means of restoring their powers in the forest protection committee.

4. Major issues
4.1 Prospects ahead: An overview of constraints and opportunities
for community conservation
Broadly speaking, efforts at community conservation in Chhattisgarh have been part of broader
social and political movements against dominant systems of resource use. Many of these movements
have attempted to incorporate egalitarian, democratic and ecologically viable methods of resource
use of the local society. For these movements, true decentralised control over resources is one
of the main precepts of community conservation, as is observed in case of the BGVS, CMM and
the Ekta Parishad. In the case of Karaundamuda, however, structures of local conservation
were incorporated into the dominant political system. Local people evolve their own systems of
management (which evolve with time), especially in order to cope with the larger problems they
are confronted with. The entire focus of the BGVS work on watershed was on upgrading the local
systems.
The second broad characteristic of these initiatives is that the fight for community conservation is
also closely associated with a vision of the future. This perception also conditions the relationship
between these movements and the State.
The Ekta Parishad, for example, attempts to re-create the radical Gandhian dream of gram
swaraj and believes that sustainable resource use and regeneration can only take place if tribal
sovereignty is established over forests. In a sense, they attempt to create a model based on
traditional beliefs and practices that is biased against modern scientific practices. Such an effort
is not hazard-free as the challenges faced in the management of natural resources are not only
 Chhattisgarh 189

local but also regional, as forests, rivers and watersheds form ecological boundaries. A study
of community-led watershed interventions in the region shows that ecologically viable water
exploitation accompanied by regeneration of natural vegetation in the area is not only possible but
can be spread over a number of gram panchayats.
Ecological boundaries do not necessarily conform to socio-political ones. The Chamanpur Milli
watershed strategy in Sarguja and Bilaspur shows that conservation units where a majority of
people benefit can only be formed successfully if the interventions are designed to follow principles
of social justice within the limits of natural boundaries and catchment areas. Experience shows
that panchayats or other formal structures like the VSS under JFM can only form such units if they
have experienced some amount of social engineering prior to the conservation effort.
In the case of the CMM and BGVS a broad anti-
capitalist vision marks attempts at community
conservation that is mostly concentrated on
mobilising disadvantaged sections of society.
The aim is to use government programmes and
institutions and build upon them through social
mobilisation and the quest for using modern
science for the benefit of the people. Thus these
movements are looking for ways of combining
local knowledge and science. However their
success has been very limited in this respect
and at best they have only been able to solve
the immediate problems of their area. Thus the
challenge before them is to realise their dream
Leaf cups used to eat out of Photo: Madhu Ramnath
of equitable distribution of resources along with
the establishment of peoples livelihoods in a
sustainable manner by using and developing these strategies further. Only in that case will we
have a system of community conservation that is able to meet the imperatives of resource use and
regeneration in a desirable way.

Archana Prasad is a Reader at the Centre for Jawaharlal Nehru Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia,
New Delhi.

References
Department and Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (Trading and Development) Cooperative
Federation Ltd., Raipur. 2003. People’s Protected Areas (PPAs) – Unlocking Forests for People: A
People Friendly Framework for Poverty Alleviation, Sustainable Forest Development and Biodiversity
Conservation through Integrated Ecosystem Approach. Chhattisgarh Forest Department and
Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (Trading and Development) Cooperative Federation Ltd.,
Raipur.

Endnotes
1
Chandrika Mago, ‘States gear up to tackle drought’,Times of India, 26 January 2001.
2
B.D. Sharma, Whither Tribal Areas? Constitutional Amendments and After (Delhi, Sahyog Pustak Kutir, 1995).
state chapter - chhattisgarh

3
http://www.censusindia.net/t_00_005.html and http://www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Religiondata_2001.xls.
Note that most tribal communities seem to be classified as Hindus, Muslims, or Christians, having been converted to
these mainstream religions at various stages of history.
4
Harilal Thakur, Chhattisgarh Gatha’, Rupantar Lekhmala 1, Raipur (1996); Harilal Thakur, ‘Jal Jangal Zamin Ke
Sangharsh Ki Shurooat’, Rupantar Lekhmala 3, Raipur (1997).
5
Anon.,‘Chhattisgarh in grip of severe drought’, Hindustan Times, 10 December 2000; Anon., ‘Farmers pack their
bags as Chhattisgarh reels under drought’, Indian Express, 17 September 2000; Hashim Qureshi, ‘Chhattisgarh reels
under severe drought’, Rediff.Com News, 15 January 2001.
6
Anon., Madhya Pradesh Human Development Report (Bhopal, Madhyam, 1998).
7
Nandini Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns: An Anthropological History of Bastar 1854-1996 (Delhi, Oxford
University Press, 1997).
8
Sources: K.C. Malhotra, Y. Gokhale, S. Chatterjee, and S. Srivastava. Overview of Sacred Groves in India (forthcoming);
D.V. Gode (ed.), ‘Central India Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (Vidarbha and Bastar)’, Prepared under National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Vidarbha Nature Conservation Society,
Nagpur (2004). Included in a CD with Securing India’s Future: Technical Report of the NBSAP-India.
9
Archana Prasad, ‘Military Conflict and Forests in the Central Provinces’, Environment and History, Vol 5 No 3 (1999),
Cambridge.
10
Thakur, Chhattisgarh Gatha. Rupantar Lekhmala 1, Raipur; Thakur, Jal Jangal Zamin.
11
District Collectors and the CEOs of Zilla Parishads can sanction projects upto Rs 1 crore without prior approval of
the state government. They also have the power to make and implement District Development Plans.
12
Source: N. Sunder, Is Devolution Democratisation? (New Delhi, 2000).
13
CSE. State of the Environment: Second citizens report. (New Delhi, Centre for Science and Environment, 1985).
14
Source: Chhattisgarh Forest Department and Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (Trading and Development)
Cooperative Federation Ltd. (2003)
15
Source: Sunder, Is Devolution Democratisation? (As above).
16
Shankar Guha Niyogi, ‘Hamara Paryavaran’, Anil Sadgopal and Shyam Bahadur Namra (eds), Sangharsh aur
Nirman: Shankar Guha Niyogi Aur Unke Naye Bharat Ka Sapna. (Allahabad, Rajkamal Prakashan, 1993).
17
Niyogi, ‘Hamara Paryavaran’. (As above).
18
Illina Sen, Perspective on Biodiversity (Raipur, Rupantar, 2000, unpublished article); Illina Sen, Hunger Stalks the
Rice Bowl (Action Aid India, n.d.).
19
R.H. Richharia, Rice in Abundance for All Times Through Rice Clones (Bhopal, 1987).
20
W.V. Grigson, Maria Gonds of Bastar (London, Oxford University Press, 1936).
21
William Ekka, ‘Nagesia Economy: A Case of Upland Farming’, in ASI, Tribal Situation in North East Sarguja (Calcutta,
Anthropological Survey of India, 1986).
22
Lok Sahitya Parishad. Dhan Ke Kansa La Phore Se, Paidawar Bhadaiyethe. Pamphlet of Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha
(1996).
23
Interview with Illina Sen, Director, Rupantar, Raipur, 31 December 2000.
24
Government of Madhya Pradesh, Rajiv Gandhi Watershed Mission Statement’, MP Government Website (1994).
25
BGVS, A Handbook for Land Literacy, Participatory Resource Mapping for Self Reliant Panchayats (New Delhi,
Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti, 1994).
26
The material for this sub-section is based on fieldwork by the author in 2000 in Jagdalli village, Jajgir district, and
Chamanpur village, Sarguja district. Meetings were held with women’s groups, villagers and interviews with the
secretary of the watershed committee and the local BGVS volunteers. Additional material is from an interview with
Tribhuvan Singh, President, Gyan Vigyan Samiti, Sarguja district, 28 December 2000.
27
Sarguja BGVS. 2000. Dagar. A newsletter of the Pratappur Milli Watershed. Ambikapur.
28
This sub-section is based on a field visit to Achanakmar, Lormi Block, Bilaspur District, 30 December 2000. The
co-ordinator of the Parishad’s work in Lormi, Rashmi Dwivedi, also shared some of this information with me.
29
The material for this section is based on a meeting with the Karaundamuda Women’s Protection Committee in
Ganeshpura, Sarguja district, 29 December 2000.
30
Rakhi is a festival marked by women tying bands or thread (rakhis) on the wrists of their brothers, and the latter
pledging to protect and support them.
31
Sangata. Annual Report, 1999-2000. (Ambikapur, Sarguja, 2001).
32
From a meeting with Bhupen Singh, the director-cum-secretary of Sangata, in Ganeshpura, 29 December 2000.
33
Joint Forest Management Update, 1998. Society for Promotion of Wasteland Development, New Delhi.
 CCA/Chhattisgarh/CS1/Bastar/Ulnar and Junawani/Forest protection

Junawani and Ulnar villages, Bastar

Background
The villages of Ulnar and Junawani situated in Bastar district of Chhattisgarh
follow a traditional system of forest protection. In Bastar cosmology, villages
were founded on the basis of land given to the founding members by the Earth,
which has therefore to be propitiated at all agricultural festivals. It is believed
that the Earth includes the spirits of the river, the forest and the mountain, to
each of whom separate offerings are made.
The appropriation and reservation of forests by the forest department (FD) in
the 1950s1 meant that the forests were officially taken out of village boundaries.
However, these forests often continued to be part of the village for ritualistic
purposes. There has continued to be a strong tradition of managing the forests
within the traditional village boundaries till quite recently, involving a system of charging residents
of other villages a small fee (known variously as devsari, dand, man or saribodi) in exchange for
use of one’s forest resources. In some villages in north Bastar, the fee was charged according to the
amount of timber taken, and it usually took the form of some liquor or meat. Some villages charged
only for good timber and not for dry or fallen wood, and other villages charged only if the wood was
stolen. Similarly, in some villages, they expected man for grazing, while others allowed grazing
free. In south Bastar, villages that used the forest of another village made collective contributions
to the Earth of that village at festival times by way of offerings. This was not necessarily a system
of forest protection as it is understood today, but it managed to regulate excessive felling and
enabled a supervisory eye on what was happening. Invariably there were cases where this system
did not work. The residents of Chitrakote, for example, complained that while paying this fee or
offering, other villages had cleaned out their forests, and now they in turn had to pay another
village to use its forests. However, by and large, in terms of forest protection it seems to have
been fairly successful.
Two examples where this traditional system has worked till not so long ago are Ulnar and
Junawani villages. Ulnar is a large village in central Bastar, comprising seven hamlets. In addition
it is the head village of 12 villages: Bajawand, Peethapur, Nalpawand, Sargipal, Dasapal, Devda,
Masigaon, Peelapadar-Karitgon, Talnar, Baniagaon, Belgaon and Tarapur.2 Ulnar had a nistari3 sal
forest of about 6000 acres (according to one villager) that was distributed among the villages with
Ulnar keeping the largest share.

Towards community conservation

The system had an exchange system for forest use. In return for the use of the forest, the
other villages each contributed some money, rice and a goat (as saribodi) to the Earth festival
in December and to the Chornia Mandai , another festival, in April. Each village had their own
jungle (forest) sarpanch or headman and also engaged watchmen to look after their forests. On
the last day of the Chornia Mandai festival, a meeting would be conducted whereby all the jungle
sarpanches met. They would discuss the state of the forests and protection efforts, and warn
case studies - chhattisgarh

villages that engaged in excessive tree felling.

In 1937 this system of traditional forest protection was discovered by the Chief Forest Officer
in charge of Bastar while he was on tour. Subsequently, a formal working plan was drawn out,
according to which the forest was divided into 7 or 8 felling series. Each felling series was assigned
to a set of villages, which were then responsible for its management and the payment of the
watchers. The felling series were further divided into forty coupes, one of which was opened every
year for tree felling, the produce being distributed among the relevant villages. Certain trees, such
as mahua, tamarind, harra, mango and trees forming the sacred grove around the local deity’s
shrine, were not to be cut.
In addition to the contributions at festival time, the sarpanches collected 1.5–2 kg of paddy per
rupee of land revenue, which was stored in a central depot that was utilized towards paying the
watchman, buying uniforms, axes, the construction and repair of the grain depot, etc. The watchmen
191
192 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

were paid 30–60 kg paddy per year and exempted from corvee (crop tax). Apart from meeting at
festivals, the jungle sarpanches met weekly (called the council by the then British Administration)
at the bazaar (market place) in Bajawand. The council had to be approved and confirmed by the
administration, which also had powers to revise the council’s judgment if necessary. The council
was vested with powers to impose a fine (upto Rs 25) for offences connected with illicit felling or
excessive removal of timber, fuel, grass, and non-timber forest products (NTFP). The money went
into ‘the furtherance of the Ulnar forest conservancy’.
Although this official systematization of the unofficial system seems to have been disbanded
around 1952, following the nationalization of the nistari forests and their conversion into protected
forests (PF),4 it has carried on informally in some form or the other.
In the neighbouring village of Junawani, the villagers have been protecting their forests since at
least the 1930s, when they contributed approximately 10–15 kg of paddy per household to hire
three watchmen. Additional money (e.g., for festivals) was raised by selling wood to neighbouring
villages which lacked forests of their own. Villages which used the Junawani forests on a regular
basis contributed grain for the watchmen, 100–150 kg of paddy and one pig at festival time (first
sowing). Timber for house construction or for a funeral was given on application to the jungle
sarpanch who would consult with the other villagers. Those who took wood without permission
were fined, or would have their tools and bullock carts confiscated and auctioned at the first
sowing. The position of the jungle sarpanch would rotate.

Opportunities and constraints

The forest department has recently started forest protection
committee (FPCs) in some of the villages (including Bajawand and
Ulnar) under the government-sponsored JFM programme. This
has apparently led to some tension and distrust between the forest
department’s nominee for jungle sarpanch and other residents. For
example, earlier if someone wanted timber to build a house, the jungle
sarpanch had the powers to assign trees on his own, but now meetings have
to be called for everything because of the breakdown in trust. Villagers are charged a fee of Rs
2000–3000 depending on what they cut, but the handling of this money is not always transparent.
Despite all these problems, it still seems to be a fairly effective system. For instance, in 1999, Ulnar
fined Tarapur Rs 5000 and a goat for stealing 30 logs of sal from Ulnar’s portion of the forest.
In Junawani, villagers claimed that while the other villages continued to use the Junawani forest,
they have now stopped contributing towards it. The villagers justify so by saying that “We don’t
say anything since people have become educated and tell us that it is not our jungle but belongs
to the government.” The turning point came in 1983-84, when villagers from Devda tried to steal
timber at night, and beat up the Junawani villagers who tried to stop them. The dispute is still
in the court. Junawani then stopped asking any of the other villages for contributions, and forest
protection by the villagers became lax.
Around 1995–6, the forest department staff held a meeting at Junawani and villagers were told
about the FD’s plans to create a 50 ha plantation which would be handed over to the village after
five years. This plantation took over some of the encroachments on lands under the jurisdiction
of the revenue department of the state government. This land was being used to grow pulses and
oilseeds to supplement paddy. Since a trench was dug around it, further encroachment has been
stopped. A watchman was appointed to look after the plantation and paid from the VFC (village
forest committee) funds. However, instead of planting mahua, tamarind, cashew (Anacardium
occidentale) and so on, as was promised to the villagers, the FD has planted mahua, bamboo sp.,
eucalyptus sp. and acacia (Acacia melanoxylon). Once the FD money began to come in, villagers
stopped contributing towards the payment of the watchman. According to them, their sense of
ownership dipped even further, and they felt that if the FD was giving money, it would ultimately
cut the forests.
On the other hand, protection seems to have improved over the past decade, despite all disputes
and the lessening of enthusiasm of Junawani villagers. The presence of the FD as a third party has
helped when offenders challenged the authority of the guards.
Conclusion
Chhattisgarh 193
Traditionally these villages have unanimously followed the rules of forest protection bound by
rituals and with due respect to the village body that decides those. However there is a reduction in
enthusiasm along with internal village disputes over timber smuggling. Despite these constraints,
this case study highlights the importance of community management as well as authoritative
legislation for forest protection. This case indicates that despite the emphasis by NGOs on complete
community management, it is important not to forget that the presence of the state as the ultimate
authority has been internalized by villagers over a century or more. Therefore, if used imaginatively,
situations like this can become a perfect example of how the government can enhance traditional
conservation practices towards forest conservation rather than subverting them.

This case study has been compiled from Sundar, Nandini. 2000. Is Devolution Democratisation?
New Delhi, Institute of Economic Growth.

For more information contact:

Nandini Sundar
Institute of Economic Growth
New Delhi-110007
Email: nandini.sundar@yahoo.com

Endnotes
1
See state chapter on Chhattisgarh in this volume for more details.
2
The information on the Ulnar nistari jungle is based on conversations with villagers in Talnar and Ulnar (1999), in
Peethapur (1996).
3
Patches of forests assigned to village communities for fulfillment of their customary rights, under the Lland Revenue
Code of the Central Provinces.
4
Category of forests declared under Indian Forests Act, 1927.

case studies - chhattisgarh

 CCA/Chhattisgarh/CS2/Sarguja/Chamanpur/Watershed conservation

Chamanpur village, Sarguja

Background
Chamanpur village lies in the Pratappur taluka of Sarguja district in Bilaspur Division of
Chhattisgarh. The total area of the village is 220 hectares. Chamanpur is one of the 29 villages
that has been taken up for the implementation of the Rajiv Gandhi Watershed Mission of the
government. The Chhattisgarh BGVS (Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti) is an organization which aims at
the use of modern science as a mechanism for the development of the disadvantaged. In 1994 the
government started the Rajiv Gandhi Watershed Mission in five areas of Bilaspur Division, aiming
at improvement of agricultural productivity of some 12,00,000 ha of land, creating employment
and recharging ground water levels. The BGVS was entrusted with the implementation of the
Mission in five areas, including Chamanpur village. The BGVS decided to use this program for
social engineering by involving local people, particularly small farmers, landless labourers and
women, as leading implementers. Following a series of bad experiences with government water
harvesting programs, people in the area had become accustomed to growing drought-resistant
crops like kodon and kutki. Some communities like the Kodaku tribals switched from cultivation to
collection of forest produce and daily wage labour for survival. The BVGS thus felt it necessary to
initiate dialogues with villagers about water use and management.1 For the organization, watershed
management emerged as an entry point for equitable and sustainable village development.
Chamanpur village is situated on the highlands of the Korba-Korea region, an economically
backward but resource-rich area in the earlier days. Most of the area is either cultivable wasteland
with sandy soil or forest area. The common tree species in forest lands are sal, tendu, harra,
behara and amla, and shifting cultivation is a common feature. According to local villagers, soil
erosion and run-off of water from the soil surface has had a negative impact on soil fertility. The
low productivity of lands has also led to deforestation and unsustainable use of forest resources
in the region.
Tribes such as Korba, Gond and Kodaku form the majority of the population in the region. The
inhabitants do not own any private land individually, but do own some of it communally. Most of
them have stopped their earlier agricultural practices and are now working on other people’s lands
as wage labourers. For this they migrate seasonally to the plains. Out-migration (along with food and
livelihood security) was one of the biggest challenges at the beginning of the watershed program.

Towards community conservation

In 1994–5, community conservation of water in Chamanpur began, based on both indigenous as
well as scientific knowledge. The villagers had good knowledge of the land classification as well as
the drainage patterns of the area. They also had a clear idea about the problems of the traditional
water harvesting systems. The most effective method to ensure that the entire process of planning
was participatory was the initiation of participatory resource mapping exercises. A kalajatha
(cultural troupe) preceded the mapping exercises and initiated dialogue with the villagers. BGVS
volunteers went from plot to plot and mapped the resources of the area in collaboration with the
villagers. During this process they gained an understanding of drainage patterns, patterns of
case studies - chhattisgarh

production and soil conservation. This was to form the basis of further planning.2
Chamanpur belongs to a watershed comprising a radius of 129 sq km. In the village 235 ha of
agriculture land and 25 ha of forest land had been conserved by the year 2000.
According to the local land classification, the watershed region was divided into three land use
categories: 1) bahra or lowlands, where rice could grow and which remained moist throughout the
year, 2) chawar or the midlands, which had seasonal water shortages and where both rice and
wheat could grow seasonally, and 3) darh or the highlands, where only trees and some vegetables
could grow. The challenge was to ensure that the water remained inside the chawar throughout
the year so that the irrigated area could increase and an attempt could be made to grow two crops
a year. A system had therefore to be innovated to channel the excess overflow of water from the
bahra into the chawar and darh lands, so that the moisture in the bahra lands was maintained
throughout the year. This land classification has played a crucial part in the creation of the system
of water harvesting.
194
 Chhattisgarh 195

Chhattisgarh was earlier known for its traditional water harvesting ponds and check-dams, which
were rebuilt by the people every year. The semi-permanent structures were traditionally
at regular intervals on the ridge-line where the speed of the water could be broken
and slowed down. The conservation of water took place through stop-dams and
check-dams and the foothills of the ridge housed traditional ponds and tanks
made by the villagers. However, according to the villagers these check dams
would get destroyed because of the speed at which the water flowed down the
ridge-lines. Under the watershed programme, this system was modified
slightly by creating permanent harvesting structures: ponds, check-
dams and stop-dams, based on the drainage maps prepared along with
the villagers.
In this context, the first year saw the construction of boulder checks
on the ridge. The traditional structures were improved slightly to make
them more durable in two ways. First, the boulder checks were made of stone and mud instead
of just mud; second, they were now made on the intersection of two drainage points in addition
to the higher slopes, in order that enough moisture would get accumulated in the soil. Contour
trenches were also dug to collect excess water and stop soil erosion. Thereafter the work moved
to the transition zone or the zone between the highland and the bahra land. There already existed
two old ponds in this zone. These were repaired and stop-dams and earthen dams were built to
recharge the groundwater level. These structures were spread over 32–35 hectares and were
linked with the natural nala that was used by the villagers to finally drain the excess water from
the rice field. This work was completed by the second year and the work on the agricultural fields
started by the middle of this period. Transition bunds and checks linked the existing ponds to each
other. New structures were also made to link the lowlands with the midlands and highlands. This
meant that the excess water could be drained into the chawar and the darh lands. The points of
transition between the lowlands and midlands were identified along with village elders, based on
their years of experience.3
Institutionally, each of the water harvesting structure has a user group. The group consists of the
person on whose land the water harvesting structure stands. It also comprises all those landed and
landless people who use the water from a particular water harvesting structure. Each user group
is represented in the Watershed Committee of the village and the secretaries of the committee are
part of a federation that represents the entire watershed at the district level.
Since most of the area was earlier forested and inhabited by the Kodaku, Korba and Gond tribals,
the committees also have a majority tribal representation. It was decided when the programme
began that the villagers would contribute 10 per cent of the labour as a local contribution into the
watershed works.4
The members of the committee are elected by all households of the village through the user
groups that represent all households. Each user group elects their own representatives in the
committee. This committee represents the entire village in the district-level watershed committee
meetings. It determines how much water is to be allocated to each household and solves inter- and
intra-village disputes.
The members of the watershed committees, all villagers and the BGVS activists initially prepared
a water use map of the entire village. Accordingly they decided how much water each family would
be allocated for their nistari (customary) and agricultural use. If some people are found to be
using excess water or disturbing other people’s water supply, they are penalised by the watershed
committee and the matter may even be brought before the gram panchayat.
case studies - chhattisgarh

Impacts of community effort

There were dramatic changes in Chamanpur as a result of water conservation, where only 35 acres
of irrigated land in the pre-Mission era increased to 40 acres in the first year of the watershed, 100
acres by the third year and 235 acres in the fourth year (the end of 2000). The highest increase
in productivity was for wheat grown on chawar lands, increasing from 120 to 1500 quintals in four
years. It was now possible to grow paddy for 4–5 months longer than earlier. Rates of migration
were reduced drastically as a high number of person days of employment were generated by BGVS
activities in four years.5
These developments would not have been possible without successful recharging of groundwater
levels and sustainable water conservation practices. In the Chamanpur watershed, the natural nala
of the village has been regenerated and the village was not much affected by the drought of 2001.
The watershed has resulted in the re-invention of some traditions. Kodaku farmers have begun to
practice collective farming. They work on each other’s land and also lend money and grain to each
196 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

other during lean periods. Together, they also conserve resources and decide on the ways in which
agricultural inputs would be used. For example they decide how much forest should be closed for
regeneration, how much water should be released in the fields, etc.
Outside Chamanpur village, 25 hectares of sal forest have been regenerated. Locally useful and
traditional species like tendu, amla, behara and harra have also been planted as a part of the
watershed mission.

Constraints and opportunities faced by the initiative

Among the main problems faced while implementing the programme were the timely transfers
of funds, as is the case with all government programmes. In the Chamanpur watershed more than
Rs 14 lakhs that were to be transferred as the last instalment were long overdue at the end of the
project period. Despite this limitation, work progressed because the community was mobilised and
oriented towards the project. This is in sharp contrast to government-run watershed programs
where work stops when funds do.
Conflicts arose between watershed committees and gram panchayats, especially where the
sarpanch represented a dominant caste and Dalit and tribal people were left out of decision-
making processes. Chamanpur initially faced this situation, but once the majority of people started
supporting the project, the panchayats themselves became sensitized and more supportive of the
programme.6
The downside of the story is the fact that the cropping pattern has undergone a change since the
increase in availability of water. High-yielding varieties of crop are being promoted because of the
agricultural policy of the government that offers higher rates for hybrid varieties as compared to
indigenous varieties. The biggest challenge for the villagers lies in the use of water conservation for
regeneration of local wild species and crops. Instead of getting swayed by high-yielding varieties,
BGVS needs to realise this and facilitate the preservation and regeneration of indigenous varieties
of rice as well as minor millets like kodon, kutki and other millets.

Conclusion
This case study reflects on the effective combination of the scientific method and the traditional
method of water conservation. Despite its constraints, the methods have been applied to a certain
extent for the benefit of the tribal people. The key attribute that has led to effective project
implementation is the high spirit and focus of the tribal people, coupled with government legislation
towards the watershed programme. The consequence of the programme has been the protection
of the forests on the watershed.

This case study has been contributed by Archana Prasad, who is a Reader at the Centre for
Jawaharlal Nehru Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.

For more details contact:

Archana Prasad
TRSA 58, NPL colony,
New Rajendra Nagar,
New Delhi-110 060
Ph: 011-3017378 (0) 011-5773212 (R)
darchie@hotmail.com

Endnotes
1
Interview with Tribhuvan Singh, President Gyan Vigyan Samiti, Sarguja District, 28 December 2000.
2
BGVS, A Handbook for Land Literacy, Participatory Resource Mapping for Self Reliant Panchayats (New Delhi, BGVS,
1994), pp. 9-12.
3
(As above)
4
Description of the watershed is based on field work in Chamanpur village, Pratappur block, Sarguja district,
conducted on 28–29 December 2000.
5
Village meeting in Jagdalli (26 December 2000) and interview with Tribhuvan Singh (28 December 2000).
6
BGVS, Dagar. A newsletter of the Pratappur Milli Watershed, May 2000. (Ambikapur: BGVS), p. 3.
 CCA/Chhattisgarh/CS3/Sarguja/Ganeshpura/Watershed development

Ganeshpura village, Sarguja

Background
Ganeshpura village lies in the Ambikapur taluka of Sarguja district in the Bilaspur Division of
Chhattisgarh. The conservation of 220 ha of sal forests by the women of Ganeshpura is an offshoot
of the effort of women of Karundamuda village1 in the same taluka.

Towards community conservation

In 1995, an NGO called Sangta came in contact with Ganeshpura. Sangta had also recently got
involved with Karundamuda village, where women facing severe fuelwood shortage had started
protecting and regenerating about 100 ha of reserved forest (RF). Realising that the women in
Ganeshpura were facing similar problems as in Karundamuda, Sangta advised Ganeshpura women
to approach Karundamuda women for advice and support towards forest protection. The women of
Karundamuda responded positively and facilitated the process of conservation and forest protection
in the village.
Ganeshpura is also now under JFM like Karundamuda and facing similar kinds of constraints.

This case study has been contributed by Archana Prasad, who is a Reader at the Centre for
Jawaharlal Nehru Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.

For more information contact:

Archana Prasad
TRSA 58, NPL colony,
New Rajendra Nagar,
New Delhi-110 060
Ph: 011-3017378 (0) 011-5773212 (R)
darchie@hotmail.com

Endnotes
1
See Chhattisgarh case study on Karundamuda.
case studies - chhattisgarh

197
 CCA/Chhattisgarh/CS4/Sarguja/Karundamuda/Forest protection

Karundamuda village, Sarguja

Background
Karundamuda village is located about 25 km outside Ambikapur, in Ambikapur taluka of Sarguja
District. The total area under community conservation is 100 ha of sal forest. The village has 100
households.
One of the villagers of Karundamuda, Rajmanbai, recalls that the village had a dense reserved
forest (RF) near the roads till the early 1980s. Thereafter the rate of the degradation of the forests
began to increase at an alarming rate. She recalls that contractors would come to the village, cut
trees and take them to the timber depot in Badrinarai located at a distance of 10 km from the
village. In addition to this, resettled Bengali refugees from East Bengal would frequent the village
at night to steal wood and cut trees. Due to indiscriminate logging and felling, 100 hectares of
sal forests were destroyed, leading to a shortage of fuelwood for the villagers. The women of the
village now needed to procure fuelwood for their personal consumption from the forest depot.
Along with this, the villagers were facing a threat of increasing theft and crime from those who
were involved in cutting timber. In this context the women of Karundamuda decided to protect
their forests through the formation of the VFPC (village forest protection committee) in 1990–1.
This committee effectively managed to regenerate the forests and was subsequently included in
the government-sponsored JFM (Joint Forest Management) scheme in 1994.1

Towards community conservation

The women who initiated the conservation efforts of the sal tract understood that regeneration
required the closure of forests to all felling activities. In order to achieve this they consulted with
the village elders and laid down rules by which the forest tract would be effectively protected.
The women formed a VFPC with the objective of regulation, management and administration
of their forest. The members of this committee consist of a woman from every family, one of
whom is elected as a secretary. The committee also carries out certain functions as a savings
group. Rajmanbai took the initiative of committee formation into her own hands and went to the
panchayats and the village elders. Having thought over the matter, the villagers, though skeptical
initially, decided to support the venture on an experimental basis. Thereafter Rajmanbai called a
meeting of 40 women in the village and asked them to choose the secretary of the committee.
Rajmanbai was elected as the first secretary.
The first step that the women took was protection of the forests against all kinds of illegal
extraction. The women patrolled the forest in groups to prevent any timber theft or tree cutting
during the day. At night they commissioned the men and the youth of the village to guard the forest.
Apart from this they also sat with the representatives of each family on the first Saturday of every
month and determined the nistari (customary) rights of each family. After the first germination of
the sal seeds, the women decided to leave the seeds in the forests instead of collecting them for
sale. Sale of sal seeds is otherwise a major source of income for the women. The villagers were
case studies - chhattisgarh

banned from cutting any trees or their branches in the first year. In order to make the villagers
conscious of their duties towards the forest, the women followed a custom of tying a rakhi (a
thread indicating that they have vowed to protect the tree) to the trees.
Along with protection and natural regeneration, the villagers also decided to plant traditional
species like tendu (Diospyros melanoxylon), amla (Embelica officinalis), mahua (Madhuca indica),
sanjha (Terminalia alata), etc. around their village. The forest, which was along the main road
and within the traditional boundary of the village, was also protected and allowed to regenerate.2
Simultaneously grazing was also regulated with only two cattle per household allowed to graze in
the forest during the daytime.3 Surplus grass from the forest was cut and sold to those who owned
more than two cattle.
The VFPC meetings are held on a weekly basis in order to review the protection measures. During
the meeting the punishments for offences are finalized, depending on the nature and volume
of the offence. The VFPC brings the cases to the gram sabha, where the issue is discussed and
198
 Chhattisgarh 199

punishments are issued. For example if someone is caught cutting green wood for fuel they would
have to pay a fine of Rs 100, which is redirected to the village development fund that is operated
by this committee.

Impacts of community conservation

Within two years the system of regulated extraction had resulted in a more dense forest. This led
to an increase in the income from non-timber forest produce. Rajmanbai notes that this was not
the case earlier, when only the contractors and the rich had access to timber and hence income
from the forests. Apart from putting in labour in afforestation programs, the women also sell forest
produce. They sell amla, fuelwood and tendu leaves in the local market that is 6 km away from
the village.
The women’s group also decided to create some community assets from the income generated
in the village fund. They, therefore, used the funds to install a tubewell for the use of villagers
two years after forest protection had started. Simultaneously women also started realizing some
income for their labour. For example, for pruning the trees the women get Rs 30 per day, and
for sowing and watering they get another Rs 30 per day. This payment is made by the VSS that
collects the funds from the village and also operates the village development fund.
The success of Karundamuda prompted the villagers of the neighbouring village of Ganeshpura
to venture into protection of 200 ha of forest area.

Opportunities and constraints

The interface of the forest protection committee with the forest department (FD) poses a major
constraint in the empowerment of VFPC. Whereas the protection was started spontaneously, the
interference of the FD has reduced the power of the committee to intervene on the basis of its
own experience. In 1994 the VFPC received administrative recognition from the FD under JFM.
In the process, the committee suffered one setback: the forest guard replaced Rajmanbai as the
secretary of the committee. Further the decisions of the VSS were now influenced by the rules
and regulations of the JFM. This meant that the women VSS members were no longer in control of
funds and could not make their own rules as freely as before.
In 1995 this village came into contact with an NGO called Sangata that brought about many
changes in this area. The first change was that the VFPC of Karundamuda received an award
from the FD for being the best of its kind in the district. The second was that the experience of
Karundamuda was replicated in Ganeshpura, a nearby village in 1997. After being persuaded by
Sangata to correspond with the women of Karundamuda, the women of Ganeshpura approached
Karundamuda. Karundamuda women motivated and organized Ganeshpura villagers by working
with them on the 220 ha afforestation programme. Finally, with the intervention of Sangata, more
systematic efforts began on finding sustainable and long-term livelihood options. The first measure
was the formation of SHGs (self-help groups). Through the working of these groups the women
were taught how to operate bank accounts as well as manage their own money. Today there are
4 SHGs in these two villages. They are regularly provided training in running nurseries and bee-
keeping and even have a project for the propagation of mulberry silkworms from the Madhya
Pradesh Sericulture Project (MPSP). Most of these projects are given to the self-help groups under
government schemes. Sangata creates the interface between the government and these groups
and also arranges their training. Thus their link with the outside world has provided them with
some livelihood support.
case studies - chhattisgarh

However, due to the control being taken over by the FD from Karundamuda forest committee
and the forest guard becoming the secretary, their own leadership has been curbed and their
decision-making powers interfered with. This is mainly because this committee is now subject to
the rules of JFM programme that has given the control over surplus, technology and produce to
the state FD.4

Conclusion
This case study exhibits a very successful initiative of the people towards forest protection that
is coupled with effective regulations for the same. However, with its inclusion under the JFM
there seems to be a dilution in the power of the VFPC and its ability to resolve issues from the
people’s perspective. The biggest challenge therefore lies in being able to maintain Ganeshpura
200 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

and Karundamuda as community-conserved and managed forests, with effective support from
outside agencies as and when needed, rather than as an imposition of an alien system.

This case study has been contributed by Archana Prasad, who is a Reader at the Centre for
Jawaharlal Nehru Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.

For more details contact:

Archana Prasad
TRSA 58, NPL colony,
New Rajendra Nagar,
New Delhi-110 060
Ph: 011-3017378 (0) 011-5773212 (R)
darchie@hotmail.com

Endnotes
1
The material for this section is based on a meeting with the Karundamuda Women’s Protection Committee in
Ganeshpura, Sarguja district, on 29 December 2000.
2
Meeting with Bhupen Singh, the director-cum-secretary of Sangata in Ganeshpura, on 29 December 2000.
3
Annual Report of Sangata, 1999-2000.
4
Joint Forest Management Update, 1998 Delhi, (Society for Promotion of Wasteland Development, 1998).
Gujarat
Community conserved biodiversity areas in Gujarat
Prahlad C., Subhash Mali, Ramesh Patel and Srinivas Mudrakartha

1. Introduction
The state of Gujarat is situated on the west coast of India between 20o 06’ N to 24o 42’ N latitude
and 68o 10’ E to 74o 28’ E longitude. It is bounded by the Arabian Sea on the west and the states of
Rajasthan on the north and north-east, Madhya Pradesh on the east and Maharashtra on the south
and south-east. The state shares an international boundary with Pakistan at the north-western
fringe. The two deserts, one in the north of Kachchh and the other between Kachchh and mainland
Gujarat, are saline wastes.
The state has a long coastline of about 1600 km, the longest in the country. Gujarat has a
geographical area of 1.96 lakh sq km and accounts for 6.19 per cent of the total area of the
country. As per the 2001 census, its population is 5.06 crore (50.6 million). The decadal growth
rate for the decade 1991–2001 has increased in comparison to 1981–91 to 22.48 per cent from
21.19 percent.
The climate of the state is tropical; however, this is considerably moderated due to the long
coastline. The temperature ranges between 1°C and 46 °C.

1.1 Forest cover of Gujarat

Forest cover has seen some positive changes since the last decade; as shown in Tables 1 and 2.
Table 1: Forest cover change in the period 1991–2001 in Gujarat State1

Sr. Assessment year Data period Forest cover Changes Cumulative change
No
(sq km)
1 1991 1987-89 11,907 - -
2 1993 1989-91 12,044 (+) 137 (+) 137
3 1995 1991-93 12,320 (+) 276 (+) 413
4 1997 1993-95 12,578 (+) 258 (+) 671
5 1999 1995-97 12,965 (+) 387 (+) 1058
6 2001 1997-99 15,152 (+) 2187 (+) 3245

Table 2: Status of Forest Cover (2001)2

Status of forest cover Area in sq km

Dense Forest 8,673
Open Forest 6,479
state chapter - gujarat

Total 15,152 (7.7% of total geographical area)

Scrub 2408
Total Area 17,560

Since time immemorial, people have managed their natural resources, be it forest, wildlife, grass
plots, livestock, wasteland, agriculture or fishing. Such efforts, when resulting in conservation, are
recognised as community conserved areas (CCAs). These CCAs have come to be recognised as
traditional systems of management that preserved people’s indigenous knowledge and practices,
ensuring continued availability of natural resources to the later generations as well.

203
204 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Unlike the current policing approach to administration, people involved in CCAs strongly believe in
and practice self-imposed rules and structures within the framework of sustainability. At the same
time development is changing their lifestyle, outlook and attitude, and their traditional knowledge
is undergoing change. Keeping pace with the change and yet conserving their system may help to
keep the environment in balance.
The present study attempts to document CCA examples from different ecological regions in
Gujarat, including in forests, agriculture, coastal areas, grasslands and wastelands. It also discusses
the changing scenario of administration, economic conditions, competition for natural resources,
development, and legal and political matters that are regulating and influencing CCA practices.

2. Community initiatives
2.1 Sacred groves (North Gujarat)
2.1.1 Introduction
The forest belt all along the eastern boundary of the state—spread across eight districts, viz.,
Dangs, Valsad, Surat, Bharuch, Vadodara, Panchmahals, Sabarkantha and Banaskantha—is
predominantly inhabited by tribal communities. According to the 2001 population census, the
tribal population is 14.8% of the total population of the state.3 Even in the midst of increasing
urbanisation, these forest inhabitants retain their own ethno-culture—their ancestral and social
traditions, laws, norms, beliefs and rituals.
One of the key ‘traditional’ factors that aid sustainable management of the environment is the
tribals’ deep respect for sacred groves. These are small patches of vegetation that have traditionally
been protected by local communities by labelling them as the abode of gods and goddesses.4 Such
traditional practices play a key role in the survival and harmonious conservation of rich, biodiverse
natural resources. No one is permitted to cut any tree or other plant, kill animals, or cause harm
to any form of life in this conserved area.
But changes in lifestyle as well as related market forces and human-induced development
seem to have adversely affected people’s faith in sacred groves and associated traditions. In this
regard, sacred groves act as an indicator of the virgin environment, as well as an indicator of the
continuing ethical values that exist in these tribes.
So far, there has been no systematic study carried out in Gujarat on sacred groves. This is an
attempt towards making a beginning in that direction. The case studies profiled below are from
the foothills of the Aravalli hill range in northern part of Gujarat (Banaskantha district) where
the tribal culture is unique but shares some common features with those in the adjoining state
of Rajasthan. Not all of them can be called CCAs but nevertheless are efforts by common people
towards conservation.

Box 1
Some examples of conservation because of sacred sentiments in
Banaskantha District of Gujarat
Balaram Mahadev Mandir
The site is on the way from Palanpur to Ambaji. Buses ply between these two places. Covering
about 4 ha, the temple and surrounding forest, is an important place of worship and beckons
many devotees. The place is one of the thrust areas of the State Government to promote
tourism. Gujarat Tourism and Development Corporation (GTDC) is already operating a guest-
house; a private resort has already come up. Total area under the conservation is about 4 ha.
The temple is situated on the banks of the river Banas that was once perennial but has now
become seasonal. This area is owned by the Balaram Mahadev Mandir Trust, and the trust
looks after the management of the temple and the surrounding forests. The Trust has imposed
a set of rules and norms, such as prohibition on cutting of trees.
There is a cultural value attached to this site. The devotee community contributes voluntarily
for the development of the site. Some people provide service in various forms, such as in
maintenance and participation in temple functions and providing a voluntary watch on the
conserved area.
The forests support a variety of flora and fauna. Some of the important species are arjun,
 Gujarat 205

kanaj, karanj, onkhlo, umbaro, Oclandra sp., aduso, kanthera, khajoor, jamun, kevda, neem,
bilva, sandal, amli, etc.
The site is also a host to a variety of species. Many medicinal plants are found to exist in this
area, such as chitrak or chitaro, wild jasmine, adathoda, bhangra, brahmi, musli, negod, etc.
At the same time some religious activities and picnicking disturb the site. Every year a mela
(fete) is held during the month of Shravan (in monsoon) that receives more than 30,000
visitors. On the 10th day of Shravan, clay idols of the deity are immersed in the river, along
with flowers, fruits and plastic carry-bags into the river, thus releasing a lot of solid waste.
The waste not only affects the quality of water and the waterbody, but also the environment.
The disposal of waste poses a serious problem to the temple authority every year. In addition,
picnickers leave behind plastic bags, food and waste that degrade the environment further.
Activities such as playing of music or vehicular movement disturb the serene atmosphere.
Often, the behaviour of the visitors is tantamount to disrespect of the traditional norms and
beliefs of the local population.
Sometimes threats to the site come in unforeseen circumstances, for example, a local newspaper
published an article revealing the medicinal value of the bark of a locally found tree, arjun in
curing heart ailments. This led to people coming here and collecting its bark. Some villages
also resorted to collecting the bark and selling it at Rs 25/kg, affecting the growth of the trees.
Another problem for the grove appears to be the rapid spread of Prosopis, a weed which is fast
filling up the riverbanks.

Kedarnath Mandir, Balundra

The temple is situated on the top of a hillock and is 5–6 kms away from the village and covers
approximately 2 hectares. The temple’s surroundings have a natural perennial water source
and support a variety of arid vegetation. The vegetation in the area includes vad, pipal, umbaro,
kanaji, asopalav, naleri, khakra and kadaya.
The legal status of the area is not clear. There is a conflict over ownership between the local
community and the forest department. These forests have been traditionally conserved for
many generations. An informal village committee is mainly responsible for management of the
site. A village elder from the Patel community heads the committee. Informal and self-imposed
rules exist within the community. The community contributes labour and money, especially
during annual gathering and religious ceremonies.
The villagers recognise that the existence of water source and the vegetation are mutually
supportive. They are therefore happy to preserve the sacred grove which also provides them
with a peaceful ambience and a source of water.
However, temple does experience a seasonal pressure during the mela in February-March every
year. About 5,000 people visit the place during the months of July and August. A road was
constructed up to the foothills in 1995-6. Another issue that has a bearing on the preservation
of the sacred grove is the continued conflict over ownership between the forest department
and the village.

Jodhasar
Jodhasar is on the way from Balaram to Ambaji, 4 km away from the main road. The total
demarcated area for each of the sacred groves is approximately 10 sq m. There are three
such plots in the village. A mud wall with some stones forms the outer boundary. The sites
(three) support various tree species, viz., khakra, pipal, khajoor, kanther, gandabaval, ber,
state chapter - gujarat

desi acasia, Opuntia, dav, dudhi, neem, and mango.

The local people take care of neem, mango and Butea seedlings under stone mulching. Every
year they plant seedlings but the survival rate is low. People visit the site whenever they
feel inclined to worship. Occasionally, a few visitors visit the site on their way to Ambaji. The
forest department is not involved in conserving the site. The village community plans to build
a temple here in future. Presently, the villagers get employment in pond construction from the
Irrigation Department under the drought relief programme.
One of these groves, the Mahadev Mandir is an important religious point for villagers. The
species found here are khakra, kanther, gandabaval, pipal, khajoor, etc. The site is free from
grazing due to the height of the trees and lack of ground cover. A small number of artificially
206 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

regenerated seedlings are under stone mulch.

Legally the land belongs to the panchayat and has been traditionally conserved for a very
long time. No formal village institution exists to manage the groves but village elders and key
persons are informally taking care of the site. As per the self-imposed rules local people do not
graze their cattle here. Many dhav and khakhra trees, known for their economic returns, are
found here but people do not extract these.5

2.1.2 Key issues of sacred groves

In our studies, it is found that the sacred groves in remote areas are generally untouched and are
more valued. Villagers very rarely visit these sites, unlike sites which are close to the main road. A
remote place like Jodhasar has seasonal visitors, whereas Balaram and Padaliya (which are close
to the main road) have a large number of visitors.
In the tribal areas, most of the trees are important, particularly as valuable sources of minor
forest produce. The species composition and density varies with the remoteness and presence of
tribal settlements. Natural regeneration in the sacred groves in remote areas is generally found to
be better than in other areas. However, the pressure of grazing is common. In the well-managed
sacred groves, the management committee or the locals procure the seedlings from outside,
though with great difficulty, as people always cannot pay much attention due to their routine
work.
Only temples managed by trustees or formal management committees have succeeded in
having ownership records, while the rest do not have any records, leading to protracted conflict
situations.
In our study, modernisation, mining and tourism practices are observed to be causing adverse
impacts. A proper balancing of these activities with the conservation of sites is the need of the hour.
Occurrence of drought is common (once every three years) and during this period livelihood comes
under stress. The result is that people are not in a position to confer due care on maintenance
of the site. Promoting MFP will help build livelihood security to a certain extent. Enhancement of
livelihood options locally will go a long way towards checking migration, which also means better
care of the sacred groves.
Finally, proper identification, documentation, networking and coordination among interested
groups need to be given a fillip. Identification and recording of the flora and fauna and their role in
supporting livelihood systems, both historically and in the present context, need to be taken up.

2.2. Grasslands
Grasslands in Gujarat are spread over a
total area of approximately 1,40,276.94
ha, and can be found in the districts of
Ahmedabad, Banaskantha, Gandhinagar,
Rajkot, Surendranagar, Bhavnagar, Kheda,
Mehasana, Sabarkantha and Surat.
The grasslands in the state can be divided
into three convenient zones: Saurashtra
accounts for 71,925.81 ha, the central zone
Banni grasslands with steppe eagles, Kachchh for 10,741.60 ha, and Kachchh for 57,609.53
Photo: Jugal Tiwari ha.
The grasslands of Gujarat consist of shrub or tree savannah type, which not only support livestock
but also diverse, rare and endangered wildlife species such as the lion, wild ass, bustard, chinkara,
black buck, blue bull, leopard, four-horned antelope and lesser florican.
Gujarat has an average of 722.59 acres of community land per village, ranking fifth in the
country. 32% of total community land is grazing land, which is high compared to the country
average of 22 per cent; in this respect Gujarat ranks third after Rajasthan and Maharashtra.
Gauchar (grazing land) is a common type of common pool resource existing in the state since
the reign of princes as well as during the British period. However, the size of the gauchar was
fixed at 16 ha/100 cattle by a government order aimed at preventing alienation of common land
for industrial development. They were managed by the gram panchayats after the formation of
Gujarat state and implementation of the Panchayati Raj Act.
 Gujarat 207

Box 2
Important grassland species of Gujarat
Grasses: Sehima nervosum, Chrysopogon fulvus, Cymbopogon jwarancusa, Heteropogon
contortus, Sporobolus marginatus, Dactyloctenium sindicum, Cenchrus ciliaris, Dicanthium
annulatum, Cynodon dactylon, Apluda mutica, Cymbopogon martinii, etc.
Herbs: Cassia tora, Crotalria sp., Sesbania sp., Digera muricata, Indigofera sp, Leucas
aspera,Ttridax procumbens, Cyperus rotundus, Desmodium diffusum, Barleria cristata, Striga
asiatica, Xanthium stromarium, etc.
Shrubs: Calotropis procera, Capparis deciduas, Cassia auriculata, Helicteres isora, etc.
Trees: Acacia nilotica, Ferronia limonia, Hardwickia binata, Butea monosperma, Zizyphus sp,
Wrightia tinctoria, Bauhinia racemosa, etc.

The state’s grasslands are under pressure due to unscientific grazing practices, invasion of weeds,
industrialisation, poor efforts at regeneration and improving productivity, poor quality of livestock,
inadequate means of livelihoods, encroachment, salinity, and general land degradation.

2.2.1 The Banni grasslands

The Banni area is a flat pasture land within the Great Rann of Kachchh and is situated in the
northern region of Bhuj taluka, between north latitudes 23o 19’ and 23o 52’ and east longitudes of
68o 56’ to 70o 32’. The temperature reaches up to 50o C in the hottest months (May and June) and
down to 5o C in the coldest months (January and February). The southwest monsoon brings very
little rain (annual average of 300 mm per year) and is ill distributed in the Banni area. Droughts
are quite common and severe. The whole year’s rainfall often falls within a short spell of 10 days
or less. Sometimes, half the annual average rainfall occurs within a few hours. No arable farming
can be practiced here. The Banni grassland, with about 40 varieties of grasses, is considered one
of Asia’s finest expanses of grass. It used to attract cattle breeders from all over Gujarat, parts
of Rajasthan, and Bombay in Maharashtra. There is an old practice of bringing salvage (i.e., dry
animals) from Bombay to Banni for grazing, and then taking them back to Bombay when they are
due for delivery.
The total Banni area is 3847 sq km. People from all over the state as well as the neighbouring
state of Maharashtra leave their livestock with the traditional herders of the Banni for grazing
purposes. The Banni accounts for nearly 45 per cent of the permanent grasses. The grasses
include species of Sporobolus, Chloris, Dichanthium, Cenchrus, Dectylectynium, Desmostachya,
Chrysopogon, Echinocloa, and herbs like species of Cressa, Indigofera, Digera, Corchorus, etc.

state chapter - gujarat

Donars grasslands of of Abdasa, Kachchh Cranes returning to roost in Kachchh

Photo: Jugal Tiwari Photo: Jugal Tiwari
208 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Figure 1: Map of the Banni area6

2.2.2 Weed menace

According to the satellite imagery of IRS-IA (1998), the Banni grassland is being wiped out at a
rate of 4188 ha/year by the invasion of gandabaval. In other words, the species is invading at the
rate of half a hectare per hour.7 Due to this, Banni’s rich flora like piludi, khijado, deshi baval and
rare birds like houbara bustard have disappeared or almost vanished.
The forest department says that the Nawab of Jamnagar first carried out the aerial broadcasting
in Gujarat during 1948–50. Prosopis is considered by some to be one of the best cattle feeds, if
processed properly, and has no adverse effect on cattle health. However, a majority of people find
this species very unfavourable, for several reasons such as, it leads to decline of water table, fallen
leaves and pods render surface water non potable, is unsuitable as green manure as it does not
have enough nitrogen content, it is also believed to be very harmful for cows although buffaloes
can survive on it well. Some people believe that it is one of the major reasons behind the reducing
population of the indigenous Kankrej breeds of cows.
The revenue department is short-staffed and the staff generally lack experience in eradicating
gandabaval. The villagers may take care of the land if it is allotted in their names. The role of
the forest department in this direction should be a strategised action plan to support villagers’
livelihood by enhancing income-generating activities, provide training and permit charcoal-making
and marketing of the same. The setting up of a particle board industry and other options to make
use of the wood will encourage the people to take interest in controlling this tree.
According to a study conducted by Gujarat Forest Development Corporation (GFDC) and Gujarat
Institute of Desert Ecology (GUIDE), the livestock-based economy generated about Rs 1,538 per
household a month from production of milk only (milk products not included), while the gandabaval-
based economy generated about Rs 73.80 per household from sale of honey, gum and charcoal
in the Banni. Hence, reclaiming and conserving the grassland is important as it supports the dairy
industry that is more profitable than the others besides being the most sustainable industry here.
The case studies recorded here are selected from the Banni area considering its fragility and
sensitivity in terms of livelihoods and ecological importance. Recognising the difficulties associated
with grasslands management, the MoEF supported Gujarat Ecology Commission8 (GEC’s) project
on Banni Grassland Restoration project in 1995–6 under the Border Area Development Programme.
The GEC and GUIDE joined hands to introduce a programme of fodder generation on small plots
of 100 ha per village. GUIDE hoped that by creating an alternate source of fodder, pressure on
common grazing lands would decrease.
The programmes have been largely successful so far. Grass grown on the plots is stored in fodder
banks in preparation for drought years. Management of the plots is left entirely to the village to
promote self-sufficiency. The productivity has increased from 400kg/ha to 846 kg/ha. Additionally,
 Gujarat 209

23 species of grass are found, compared to 13 species before the plot was protected.9 The success
of the programs is further reflected in the eagerness of villages to participate: while villages were
initially reluctant to initiate a management programme for fodder generation, 17 villages have now
asked for GUIDE’s help in starting their own plots.
In addition to the above mentioned projects, at many sites, communities have regenerated
grasslands and other ‘wastelands’, or managed them for sustainable resource use in such a way
that the ecosystem has been conserved. Interesting examples of this are Jaljevdi and Hirava
villages bordering the Gir Wildlife Sanctuary in Amreli district, and Layyeri village of Nakhatrana
taluka in Kachchh.

Box 3
Examples of management of grass plots and grasslands10
Bhirandiyara grass plot
Bhirandiyara grass plot is located approximately 50–60 km from Bhuj. The total area of the plot
is about 100 ha. This area is a part of Asia’s finest grassland or Banni lands. The grassland is
however, now invaded by prosopis, and the salinity in this area is increasing. Legally this land is
under the revenue department. A formal committee of 7–8 members was set up in 1996 to look
after the 100 ha grassland and received financial and technical support from GEC and GUIDE.
The activities and rules of the committee include, clearing gandabaval to raise grasses; to look
after the 100 ha grassland, raising, protecting and using the grassland, among others. GEC
bears the salary of the guard. All the villagers are eligible to collect the grass, either by paying
Rs 2 per kg without labour or collecting free by rendering their services to cut the grass.
The plot has been cleaned and kept free from gandabaval, which has increased the grass
production. The total production of grass during 1999 was 8 tons and this was distributed free
to the villagers. The villagers are motivated by the success and have planned to dig staggered
trenches on the site for moisture conservation. Emergence of a leadership and awareness are
among the striking impacts of the community participation.
Dhordo grass plot
Dhordo grass plot is approximately 80 km from Bhuj. In 1996, about 200 ha of grassland was
given to the villagers on an experimental basis by the government to develop and manage.
Legally, this land belongs to the revenue department. The management of the plot is looked
after by the village formal committee, GEC and GUIDE.
One of the major problems is the spread of Prosopis which was planted here by the forest
department in 1958. Additionally, the grassland has to be protected from illegal harvesters.
The committee prefers to fence the area so that the major cost of protection and supervision
can be reduced. Presently the committee is incurring an expense of Rs 32,000, at the rate of
Rs. 2,000 per month to 4 guards during the 4-month grass production season. On the other
hand the grass quality and quantity produced in the conserved plot is good, and the invasion
of Prosopis juliflora has now been controlled. The cooperative system helped the people to
prepare a common well to overcome drought. The total production of grass in 1997 was 3547
kg/ha—84 kg/ha on degraded and grazed land, and 216 kg/ha in the Prosopis-invaded area.
This has been distributed among the villagers.
Sadiyo grass plot
Sadiyo grass plot is located approximately 75–80 km from Bhuj and covers about 100 ha
and legally is under the revenue department. With the help of the GEC and GUIDE a village
committee was formed in 1996, which received technical and financial support from GEC and
GUIDE. The management committee has assigned the labour to different committee members.
state chapter - gujarat

The villagers are taking care of cleaning, levelling, weeding and cutting, as well as distribution
of grasses. The plot is not fenced, so protection is a problem. The committee appoints guards
to watch the plot. According to the villagers the removal of gandabaval helps in the growth
of grasses, its palatability and nutrition status, and checks the present domination of non-
palatable grasses over palatable grasses. The villagers get the grass from grass plots and, as
an alternate nutrient, livestock are also given cotton seed and agricultural residue purchased
from village contributions and returns from the plot.
Layyeri, Bhuj
Layyeri village of Nakhatrana taluka is dominated by the Jat community. Livestock management
210 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

is a major component of the livelihood pattern of the villages. Over a period, their experience
over unmet demands and degrading resources of grasslands brought about a realisation of the
importance of the grasses, and soon the village community took to conserving the grassland.
As a result, a formal committee came into existence to look after the grasslands. A registered
village committee with the help of Sahajeevan, a local NGO, is taking care of about 200 acres
of grass plot since the last several years. The committee involves 10 executive bodies of which
5 are women. Sahajeevan provides technical and financial inputs while the committee carries
out management, planning and distribution of the responsibility of carrying out the protection
activities and also the distribution of the grass to the villagers. The collected grass is used when
there is scarcity, so currently they are storing the grass in the village godown. The villagers
contributed Rs10 every month and they have a sizeable savings in their account. The Rs 2
lakh present in the savings bank will be used to acquire grass in case of extreme scarcity.
Additionally, villagers benefit from the increased milk production and turning gandabaval into
charcoal.

2.3. Mangroves
The state of Gujarat has the longest coastline (1600 km) among Indian states and supports a
variety of marine flora and fauna. The area under mangrove cover along the Gujarat coast is the
second largest in India, next only to the Sunderbans. These mangrove formations are isolated and
discontinuous, and are found from Kandla and Navalakhi in the north to Jodia, Jamnagar, Sikka,
Alaya and Okha along the coasts of the Gulf of Kachchh. Many islands such as Pirotan, Bhaider
and Dhani also have good mangrove forests. As many as seven mangrove species are reported
from Gujarat. The mangroves of Kachchh are in general of the open scrubby type with low wooded
species of Avicenna and Rhizophora. In Dwaraka and Poshitra mostly a single species, Avicennia
marina, is seen.
The southern coast of the state supports negligible mangrove area, while Kachchh and Jamnagar
regions possess dominant and luxuriant mangroves vegetation. In this chapter we cover case
studies from the south coast and Jamnagar regions.

Box 4
Conservation of mangrove forests because of sacred sentiments in Jamnagar
Chusana Island
Chusana island, locally called Pir, is 30 km from Bet Dwaraka in Jamnagar District of Gujarat.
This island houses mangrove species like Avicenna morina, Avicenna officinalis, Avicenna alba
and Salvadora, and provides a breeding ground for many birds. The island was included in the
Kachchh Marine Sanctuary in 1980.
The villagers of Bet Dwarka belong to the Badela, Sanghar and Vadher communities and
have been informally protecting the ecosystem for religious and socio-cultural reasons for
generations. All kinds of biomass collection, including even dried twigs and branches, are
socially not allowed in the island. The religious sentiments of the people have helped to save
this mangrove vegetation for over 300 years. This site is used as a safe breeding ground by
many birds.

2.4 Community tree plantation

Another interesting concept that involves common people in nature regeneration in Gujarat is
called the creation of vriksha mandirs by Swadhyaya Parivar.
The trees are cultivated and managed, as a mark of devotion and dedication to nature and God,
by the members of the Parivar, who constitute at least 80 per cent of the participating village/
villages in the respective area. The objective of the concept is to inculcate a feeling of unity among
human beings through contributing labour for tree protection and worship.
The cultivation is done on leased government wasteland or on the land purchased by the
Swadhyaya Parivar. The entire operations including harvesting and marketing of the produce are
carried out by them. The profit is either distributed amongst the families of the Parivar or used for
running educational institutes. The vriksha mandirs in Gujarat were started in 1980 with the very
first one at Rajkot in 1979. The next one was in Veraval in 1980.Currently in the state there are 19
 Gujarat 211

units of 4–28 ha spread across 11 districts of Gujarat.11 These are managed by the formal village
groups and Madhavi Rakshan Samithi (MRS) in different villages. For the protection of the Vriksh
Mandirs, one or two local managers, on rotation, are assigned to be present in the plot everyday.
At least 300 such local managers are in the field everyday. Devotees come to the Vriksha Mandir
in the months of Margsheersha and Shravan to offer pooja (pray).

2.5 Community participation in forest resource management12

Since the early 1980s, efforts have been made to involve local communities in the protection,
regeneration and development of forests in the state of Gujarat. In the mid-80s, when Phase I
of the social forestry programme under the World Bank scheme started, emphasis was laid on
involving local people. These efforts were, however, restricted to mere planting and raising trees.
Around this time, scarcity was declared in many parts of Gujarat, due to continuous drought
from 1985 to 1987. The situation was turning from bad to worse, as the needs of the people with
respect to fuelwood, fodder and small timber could not be met. A beginning was made in some
of the villages of south Gujarat in 1987, to address the regeneration issue. Starting with three to
four villages and a few hectares, the joint forest management (JFM) scheme today encompasses
more than 1300 villages and covers over 1,75,000 hectares in Gujarat. The JFM resolution was
based on the National Forest Policy 1988 and the guidelines issued by the Government of India in
1990. Pertinent to note here is the fact that JFM activities in Gujarat preceded the resolution of the
Government of Gujarat.

Table 3: Extent of joint forest management programme in Gujarat (March 2002)13

Sr. Name of forest division No. of JFM Forest area brought

no. committees under JFM (ha)
01 Rajpipla (East) 138 10,165.00
02 Rajpipla (West) 149 12,116.00
03 Vyara 109 15,295.10
04 Valsad (N) 52 8,671.56
05 Valsad (S) 57 10,329.00
06 Baria 192 34,831.40
07 Godhra 121 20,808.75
08 Chhotaudepur 255 48,356.35
09 Sabarkantha 96 8,592.31
10 Sabarkantha(S) 122 9,292.88
11 Banaskantha 35 2,548.08
12 Gandhinagar 10 536.20
TOTAL 1340 1,75,083.97

2.6. Community interest in animal care

Chabutara for feeding birds
state chapter - gujarat

Chabutara (a platform) is an institution that focuses on feeding birds, particularly in seasons

when food becomes scarce. Such an idea emphasises the sensitivity we need to have for
the rights of other non-human living beings to co-exist with us, even in a drought year. This
practice is managed in some villages by nature-loving individuals, while in others it is managed
by communities. The tradition of feeding birds is very old and found among most cultures
around the world. However, it has continued as a living tradition only in some regions. Most
bird-feeding platforms in Gujarat are found in the North. Different norms have evolved among
local communities for pooling grain and feeding the birds. A chabutara is a small 10–12 ft high
platform constructed with bricks with an open pan on top where grains are kept. The design and
architecture of a chabutara may vary from village to village. Traditionally, whenever someone
commits an unlawful action like stealing cattle or cutting trees from the village commons
212 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

(gauchaar) and forest, they are asked to give a certain amount of grain as a penalty. Sometimes
people also donate grains once their wishes (manyata) have been fulfilled. Sometimes a small
share of the grains that was sold to grain merchants is kept for the birds.

3. Key issues and recommendations

The success of conservation and sustainable use of resources is a function of formal recognition
and legal support. Developing a positive administrative outlook with a synchronised scientific
approach along with community knowledge and its use will be a more viable strategy to attend to
the multiple objects of conservation. Taking into account the success of these age-old traditional and
indigenous systems of management, an urgent need is to review the existing Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972, and declare these sites as ‘Community Conserved Areas’, on par with the other category
of protected areas. There should be sufficient legal space for these communities from planning to
implementation. If so, the recognition will definitely open a new era of conservation with the use
of traditional knowledge.
Hence, supporting the community requires special attention and special plans to strengthen their
capacities and capabilities for sustained results. The ground reality is that communities are ready
to go to any extent (except financial involvement) to take part in conservation activities supporting
their livelihoods. It is also important that the flow of money in conserving these areas should be
prioritised in such a way that it should be restricted to the community. It should be mandatory for
the revenue to be reused for management and improving the productivity of the site.
Apart from these comprehensive guidelines at macro level, there are some immediate issues to
be addressed, particularly in some of our study areas of community interventions, due to their
multiple functions.
The significance of the conservation of some of the CCAs of Gujarat enlisted here is that they
have a greater role in promotion of the existing Protected Area Network. In case of sacred groves,
areas of Jessore WLS and Banni areas support directly and indirectly many other adjacent protected
areas of Kachchh and Saurashtra respectively. The sloth bear and panther are key species of
Jessore WLS. The Great Indian bustard, flamingo, migratory birds and many indigenous cattle
breeds are significant species of the Banni and its surrounding area. Hence, the species richness
and uniqueness of these areas require a comprehensive management strategy and action plan.
The sacred groves listed here in this study are from the area of Jessore WLS, one of the three
WLS of Gujarat known for the existence of typical sloth bear habitat.
In this way, sacred grove conservation in this area has a broader perspective to reduce the stress
on surrounding wilderness. For proper management of integrated planning and management, the
issues given below are hurdles that need to be tackled.

3.1. Suggestions for supporting sacred groves

Habitat destruction is a serious concern caused by overgrazing, mining and quarrying, lopping
of wooded trees, invasion of Prosopis juliflora and hunting of a few birds like red spurfowl, Indian
peafowl, bulbul, etc.
It is observed that people have taken some interest in regenerating sacred groves. However, the
rate is very low. The forest department should supply suitable species as required. In most of the
cases the sacred groves’ management committees or locals procure the seedlings from outside
with great difficulty. This actually reduces the interest of the villagers, as they cannot pay much
attention due to their routine work.
Most of the sites are affected by soil erosion. This is resulting in depletion of groundwater.
Thus the sacred water, a culturally important component of the environs, is missing. The soil and
moisture conservation (SMC) efforts will definitely benefit these sites to address the community
needs and to perform ecological functions. Even the sacred groves managed by trusts are also not
being given due care towards SMC. Where geological conditions favour, SMC (soil and moisture
conservation works) should be promoted.
In terms of legal status, the sacred groves in the sanctuary area are either situated on lands
governed by the forest department or the revenue department, or are owned by private individuals.
In some places the gram panchayat is the owner of a sacred grove. Only temples managed by
trustees or formal management committees have ownership records while the rest have no records.
The forest department should take lead in identification, documentation and recording, and in
 Gujarat 213

networking and coordinating with interested groups. Simultaneously, mass awareness should also
be stepped up to give a fillip to the conservation of these sites.
Cement constructions are gradually coming up in some sacred groves. Sacred groves are slowly
turning into man-made landscapes with the construction of cement domes, temples, seating
arrangements, etc. Due to this, the trees in the vicinity are disappearing. This development should
be checked at this stage. The reasons for this development are the influences of modern lifestyle
and exposure to other areas. Balaram Mahadev Mandir is an example of the state government’s
thrust areas to promote tourism. Gujarat Tourism Development Corporation (GTDC) is already
operating its guesthouse and a private resort has also come up.
In some cases it has been observed that village development schemes through panchayat funds
are coming up. Villagers are unaware of the expenditure incurred in such schemes and modern
infrastructure is created without people’s involvement. The community participation is a must from
planning to implementation.
At present, there is no working plan to explain either the management strategies or people’s
involvement in maintenance and development of these sites. The forest department should take
keen interest in promoting conservation of these sites. Thus, special management plans (working
plans) including creation of a separate sacred-grove circle within the forest department could
help.

3.2 Suggestions for supporting grasslands

State grasslands are neglected by the government due to scarcity of water and salinity. However
the government was not ready to hand over the Banni area to the forest department14. The forest
department is managing the area since 1952 but actual ownership is with the revenue department.
Availability of rich minerals in the area has ensured that the state government has not notified
these as protected, since after notification the Government would have had to approach the Union
government for prior approval to denotify it for non-forestry activities. The villagers’ long-standing
demand is the allocation of land in their name, which has also not happened. It is therefore vital
to settle ownership disputes at the state level for efficient community based management of the
Bannis.
Spread of prosopis juliflora as a weed is one of the major problems in these grasslands. Forest
department, which has to some extent encourage this, is of the opinion that no other species
is effective to halt the desertification. They are now planning to introduce Acacia senegal, P.
cineraria and Sueda nudifolra, which are also saline resistant, as alternate species in this area. The
experience of the villagers indicates that there is potential to grow some of the local species like
mango, neem, piludi, etc. here. It is also a fact that tree species, viz., neem, pipal,vad, mango,
ber and Acacia nilotica are found in the surrounding areas as alternates to Prosopis juliflora. There
is therefore a need to:
Conduct research on identifying the suitable bio-control methods
• Identify and promote the best alternate and optimal economic returns from the weed
• Permit villagers to make and sell coal from Prosopis
• Set up particle industries/leaf processing units
• Encourage planting of native species
• Provide incentives and awards to local people involved in weed control
Industrial development near or within the vicinity of common land is a great threat to common
access. Due to industrial expansion, the villagers have lost much of the common land and in many
state chapter - gujarat

areas milk production has gone down affecting the rural economy.
Encroachment of grazing lands is another serious problem. As per details available on 47 villages
from Narmada and Bharuch districts, the protected area under JFM are more than 2000 ha and
community plantation is 751.5 ha, whereas the encroachment here is 732 ha (63 per cent) and 100
ha (24 per cent) on gauchaar and revenue land respectively. Encroachment is overtaking protection,
particularly on gauchaar land, which is a real constraint for community access. Encroachment of
common land and its frequent regularisation by political forces have been responsible for de-
communisation of common lands. There is a significant reduction in village common lands available
for community purposes. The dependence on common property land resources (CPLR) is increasing,
especially from the small and marginal landholders and landless. Unless a solution is found at
micro level, the problem will not be solved. Usually in case of encroachment the panchayat and
214 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

the talathi side with encroachers. The role of panchayat is individual specific. Thus the strategy
should be to:
• Sensitise panchayat members about encroachment issues
• Change the land-use policy in favour of village commons and their functions
• Carry out proper urban and industrial planning

Gulf of Kachchh coast, Kachchh Photo: Jugal Tiwari

It is vital to encourage people’s participation in promotion of joint grassland management

activities. Initiating JFM activity in this area is favourable but management strategies should be
different from the normal JFM guidelines so that the easy access, benefit sharing and institutional
process is given due care. In one way the institutionalisation may reduce the common access and
conflicts. In particular, the following steps are needed:
• Promote proper soil moisture conservation activities.
• Identify genetically superior salt resistant palatable grass species and multiplying.
• Mandatory assignments to enrich the quality of the private grassplots.
• Promote stall feeding
Another point is to emphasise the need for a grazing policy. There is no grazing policy as such,
either at state level or at central level. It is equally known that there is no grassland sanctuary or
park in India, though the Banni and some high-altitude pastures have the potential for this. Hence
formulation of a grassland policy is urgently required.
This is a unique opportunity to declare PAs in grasslands so to boost the terrestrial ecosystem
component which are already existing for key animals, plant and marine species. The grasslands
of Saurashtra and Kachchh play an important role in wildlife management. To elaborate, the
grasslands of the Saurashtra, Surendranagar and Kachchh regions form a triangular corridor in a
sense, although not strictly according to definition. Proper management of these grasslands would
reduce the escalating pressure and conflict between the livestock, wildlife and humans.
Banni being an important grassland and wetland site has a potential to be declared as a PA. The
Chari Dhundh is an important wetland of considerable international significance. This area was
proposed and has been accepted by the government of India for declaration as a Ramsar site. Thus
this area along with adjoining areas of the Banni should be declared as Banni Wildlife Sanctuary,
with participatory management principles.
Banni will be the last chance of survival for cattle from Kachchh, Rajasthan, Banaskantha and
adjoining areas, which flock to the grassland during the worst of droughts.15 The Banni people are
predominantly pastoralists who keep large herds of buffaloes, cows, sheep, goats and camels. The
Banni buffalo is considered one of the promising native breeds of India. Many Maldharis (the cattle
breeders of Banni) have been forced by environmental stress to migrate to other parts of Kachchh
or Gujarat. This in turn results in over-exploitation of mangroves for fodder and fuel by local
communities and cattle herders, which further reduces the natural regeneration by natural as well
as man-made factors. These cover reductions result in water inflow leading to increased salinity,
violent sea action, frequent cyclones, etc. This ultimately results in diversion of mangrove lands
for other uses like salt pans, industries etc., which thus become unable to perform their ecological
functions in the long term.
To tackle these issues, the following is needed:
• The Banni women have contributed much to Indian culture and art. Their embroidery is considered
to be among the best in the country. Promotion of this art definitely has the potential to support
the livelihood options of the area.
• Discouraging the migration of people and cattle from this area. This is required for greater socio-
economic and ecological benefits.
 Gujarat 215

• Promotion of NTFP collection and use through capacity-building

3.3 Joint forest management

Camel grazers in Banni grasslands Photo: Jugal Tiwari

The JFM programme has found wide acceptance and is evolving in the state according to the local
conditions to suit the variations therein. However, this initiative that involves active participation of
people has thrown up a number of issues that need to be addressed. It is understood that there are
no uniform solutions. Yet, in keeping with local socio-economic, political, agricultural, traditional
and forest conditions, the issues need to be addressed adequately. Such issues are listed below.
3.3.1. Institutional management unit
The Gujarat JFM resolution identifies panchayats as possible management units, but not a
single panchayat has come forward to implement the same. There had been instances to indicate
impracticability of standard units. It was observed in a study that while the government resolution
(GR) required participation of all the hamlets of the village, only one hamlet was interested in piece
of forest that was to be protected. In another case a large chunk of forests that is traditionally used
by a number of villages got assigned to one particular village by virtue of it being in the revenue
boundary of that village, leading to a conflict. The 73rd amendments to the Constitution in 1996 has
recommended the gram sabha (village assembly) as the decision making unit at the village level,
this needs to be implemented with respect to forest management.
Organisational format and institutional set-up: The issue of organisational format is most
prevalent in JFM in Gujarat. When the programme was launched, it was natural to be dependent
on the system that already existed. So, the forest protection committees (FPCs) in Gujarat were
registered under the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961. It came very naturally in Gujarat
because of the history of cooperative ventures. This had some positive aspects. An FPC became an
independent legal body. Being registered with the registrar of societies, it is a legal entity and not
an extension of any other institution.
A cooperative society is based on membership and shares. The people who cannot pay membership
cannot avail of the benefits. In a sense this is logical. But when we talk of a common property
resource (CPR) then the question arises: how can only a few persons from the village community
decide to cordon off a CPR and share the resource?
Furthermore, there are lots of instances wherein membership increased after a period of time—
i.e., when the people who could not really afford to take part in the venture without being sure of
the benefits, become members because otherwise they would lose out on the resource completely.
In one village, membership is now closed for non-members because results are visible, and these
people thus get nothing of a resource they were traditionally using. In some cases, membership fee
has increased so much that it is difficult for people to shell out the money even at the cost of not
having any access to this resource. It is just that they cannot pay—e.g., the current membership
fees of the Malekpur village co-operative society is in excess of Rs. 3000.
Relationship with panchayats: Panchayats are recognised democratically elected institutions
representing villages. It will be pertinent to look at the relation between the village-level
state chapter - gujarat

organisations (VLOs) proposed under JFM and the panchayats with reference to recent legislation
assigning specific role to panchayats/gram sabhas in forest management.
Powers to VLOs: There have been suggestions that VLOs be empowered to deal with village
offenders to be able to protect the forest effectively. Nyay panchayats do have powers to deal with
certain offences. It has to be examined legally as to how VLOs can be authorised in this regard.

3.3.2. Technical
Viability: Viability of JFM as an economic pursuit has often been assumed. It may be desirable to
examine the assumption and address lacunae, if any.
216 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Micro plan vs. working plans: With the understanding that preparation of a Working Plan is
an elaborate exercise with provisions for approval from the state and national governments,
government resolutions for JFM should invariably include the process of village-level micro-plan
preparation. Further the Working Plans must provide flexibility to incorporate the provisions of
works of micro-plans, as this will facilitate the flow of benefits to local people in the short and
medium run. It is also imperative that in JFM areas, the working plan should be prepared on the
basis of micro-plans and not otherwise. Such an approach would also be in conformity with the
new forest policy, which deals with conservation and meeting the needs of the local people in a
sustainable manner. The concept of creating JFM working circles would facilitate this process.
Production options: Ecological sustainability and economic viability, including the need for a
continuous flow of benefits to sustain enthusiasm of the FPC members in the face of high discount
rates, are the technological challenge that may require serious silvicultural interventions. The
inputs in this direction have been lacking. The present practice of trying to incorporate species into
the plantation programmes yielding different NTFP may not be sufficient to address the concern.
Developmental inputs: The pioneering efforts that have largely been quoted for successful JFM
rely largely on inputs to increase employment opportunities, improve agriculture and provide for
village needs to varying extents. Developmental and other entry point activities are essential
ingredients for a successful JFM programme. Appropriate institutional arrangements to provide for
the entry point activities need to be strengthened. However, the present token provisions are too
few to enthuse the local people.
3.3.3. Intra-/Inter-village issues
Benefit sharing: When the adhikar patra (record of rights) for JFM is given to a village, it mentions
an amount of forest that is understood to be under the programme. No plot, however, is actually
demarcated in the forests. The adhikar patra does not normally cover the whole of forestland. But
people protect the whole of the forest land and expect that the share will come from the entire plot.
This is going to create a problem because over-expectations that have been built will crash and
lead to mistrust of the government. It is a gap between what is written vis-à-vis the understanding
that people have.
Currently, when issues do crop up, decisions are taken by particular forest officers. So in future
too it would be left entirely to their wishes/decisions and they may or may not feel that it is the
right of people to get a share from the entire forest area.
Marketing of NTFPs: The JFM programme is no doubt oriented towards the subsistence needs
of local communities, but once the produce of forests increases through proper protection there
is every likelihood of production increasing beyond what can be consumed within the village
itself; hence the importance of marketing. Moreover many NTFPs have traditionally been used by
the gatherers to generate cash incomes. However, old restrictions imposed in the past on their
processing and sale are still in place. The poor have no right to process these items and sell them
freely in the market.
As the commercial importance of NTFPs increased in the past, the state government nationalised
almost all important NTFPs during the 1960s and 70s. In theory, this right was acquired ostensibly
to protect the interests of the poor against exploitation by private traders and middlemen. In
practice, such rights were sub-let to private traders and industry. Thus, a hierarchy of objectives
developed: industry and other large end-users had the first charge on the product at low and
subsidised rates; revenue was maximised subject to the first objective, which implied that there
was no consistent policy to encourage value addition at lower levels and the interests of the poor
and tribals were relegated to the last level or completely ignored.
There is an immediate need for the Gujarat Forest Department and the people’s institutions (JFM
groups) to enter into an agreement so that clarity on matters such as roles and responsibilities
and benefit sharing of both intermediary as well as final harvested products is made. This will
also provide a locus standii for the communities so that they will continue to take part in the
regeneration of the forests more enthusiastically; The Gujarat Forest Department had circulated a
draft agreement in 1994–5. Several important amendments to the same have been suggested by
the primary and secondary stakeholders for consideration by the department. The final document
of the agreement is still awaited.
The responsibility of protection, increased production, and judicious and sustained use of forests
should lie with the village-level institutions coming under the precincts of JFM initiated by Gujarat
Forest Department. Unlike panchayats, powers to the FPC are not given under any law; the state
government resolutions recommend FPC as mere functional groups. These FPCs would therefore
find it difficult to manage resources on a long-term basis. Their relationships with the statutory
 Gujarat 217

village panchayats will need to be sharply defined or an act passed in the state legislative assembly
providing statutory rights to the JFM groups.
To further strengthen and scale up JFM in the state, the forest department should provide
financial support to the community-based organisations/NGOs for carrying out various awareness
generation and capacity-building activities, in addition to protection of forest areas.

3.4 Scope and potential of religious agencies in biodiversity

conservation
Religion is a long-term politics and plays a key role in communicating with both the rural and
urban masses. The biodiversity conservation aspect is nothing new to any religion in any part of
India. But under the present circumstances people are not realising the crux of religion. In this
context realising the significance of biodiversity from the religious point of view is urgently required.
Some religious bodies and leaders have already taken bold step in this regard. Some of the
religious institutions are enjoying the benefit of land lease and managing gaushahlas (cattle yards),
wastelands, and grasslands. Some are already doing well in watershed activities. However, using
science and religion for identification of latent areas of intervention would be advantageous.

Table 4: Sacred Groves: District-wise study areas in Banaskantha District16

Taluka Village Area Nearest place (km)

Danta Rinchadi, Jetvas 1 acre Ambaji (5.1)
Danta Chokibar NA Ambaji (34)
Danta Kundel 2 acres Palanpur (40)
Danta Jodhsar NA Palanpur (55)
Danta Kheraniumbari 4 acres Ambaji (30)
Danta Rupavasa 0.5 bighas Palanpur (56)
Danta Pipalavali Vav NA Palanpur (51)
Danta Taleti NA Palanpur (51)
Danta Padaliya 1 acre Ambaji (15)
Danta Chauri 2 acres Palanpur (50)
Danta Dabhachitra 1.5 acres Ambaji (22)
Danta Khermal 2 acres Ambaji (35)
Danta Viramveri 1 acre ambaji (20)
Danta Kanabia vas 1 bigha17 Palanpur (50)
Danta Pataliya 1 acres Palanpur (42)
Palanpur Khemrajiya NA Palanpur (25)
Palanpur Khapra 2 bighas Palanpur (15)
Palanpur Khuniya(Amirgad) 1 acre Palanpur (20)
state chapter - gujarat

Palanpur Sarotra 2 acres Palanpur (32)

Palanpur Chitrasani NA Palanpur (15)
Palanpur Balundra NA Palanpur (30)
Palanpur Pedagara 5 acres Palanpur (20)
Palanpur Ghanta NA Palanpur (33)
Palanpur Gawra NA Palanpur (39)
Palanpur Isawani 1 acre Palanpur (38)
218 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Palanpur Ukarada NA Palanpur (20)

Palanpur Khara 2.5 acres Palanpur (40)
Palanpur Dharmata 2.5 acres Balaram (2)
Palanpur Surela 2.5 acres Palanpur (30)
Palanpur Khunia NA NA
Palanpur Dungarpuri NA NA
Palanpur Bajotiya NA NA

Table 5: Newly Identified Sacred Groves in Balaram-Ambaji and Jessore Sanctuary18

Sr.No. Sacred Grove Village/Taluka

1 Kalomagro (Mataji) Khadhorumri/Danta
2 Maneknath Vekdi/Danta
3 Mahadev Khermal/Danta
4 Guru maharaj ni dhuni Kherani Umri/Danta
5 Hanuman Temple KhadhorUmri/Danta
6 Virbapji Hadad/Danta
7 Bhakhorbapji (Virbapji) Motapipodra/Danta
8 Chamundamata Kunvarsi/Danta
9 Salfiyobhakhor Bhadrmal/Danta
10 Vagod Khari/Danta
11 Zer Kundol/Danta
12 Sembali Mahadev Vasi/Danta
13 Sitlamata Ghareda/Danta
14 Ramapir Dipdi/Danta
15 Rokdiya Hanuman Machkoda/Danta
16 Chamunda mata Bhilachal/Danta
17 Kunteswar Karza/Palanpur
18 Rameswar Mahadev Rajpuriya/Palanpur
19 Vav Mahadev Khara/Palanpur
20 Mansarovar Jethi/Palanpur
21 Ashapuri Piplavalivav/Palanpur
22 Rakhpal Harivav/Palanpur
23 Kalkamata Deri(Vavdhara)/Palanpur
24 Amleshwar Ranol
25 Hanuman Temple Hariyavada
26 Sitlamata Hariyavada
27 Maha kalimata Hariyavada

The original version of this paper was prepared as a sub-thematic review for India’s National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan process (see http://www.kalpavriksh.org/f1/f1.1), and
was updated and modified for this publication in 2006.

Endnotes
1
Source: Gujarat Forest Department website, http://gujaratforest.gov.in/forests/for_cover.htm
2
Source: Report of Forest Survey of India (2001).
3
Primary Census Abstract : Census of India 2001
4
Sacred groves - An Environmental Ethics - B.N. Roy and Sudipto Chatterjee
5
S.D. Sabnis, ‘Sacred groves and Gujarat’, Paper presented at the Workshop on Conservation and Development of
Sacred Groves, Rajkot, Gujarat, November 18–20, 1997.
6
Source: www.gisdevelopment.net
 Gujarat 219
7
Shyam Parekh, Gandabaval Set to Gobble Up Banni Grassland by 2005 AD, Times of India, 29 September 1998.
8
Gujarat Ecology Commission (GEC) was established by the Government of Gujarat in 1992 with the following
mandate. To provide an organization that plans and works for restoration of ecologically degraded areas. To arouse
ecological consciousness among the people of Gujarat and to develop a conservation ethos in the state. To undertake
on its own or with the support of other agencies, restoration of disturbed eco-systems of the State, with special
emphasis on degraded lands. To create institutions and organizations necessary for achieving the objectives of
GEC. To act as the State’s single umbrella for accreditation of various NGOs eligible for funding for activities aimed
at ecological restoration of degraded eco-systems, and allocation of funds to various non-government agencies for
ecological restoration programs.
9
Y.D. Singh and V.V. Kumar, Status of Banni Grass Land: Exigency of Restoration efforts (Vadodara, Gujarat
Ecological Commission, 1998).
10
Trupti Jain, Strengthening Local Institutions – Role of Gram Panchayat For Management of Grazing land in Gujarat.
Regional workshop report of the Common Pool Resources (CPR) in Semi Arid India.15–16 March 2001, Ahmedabad.
11
S.A. Chavan, ‘Sacred groves for tree worship’, Paper presented at the Workshop on Conservation and Development
of Sacred Groves, Rajkot, Gujarat, 18–20 November 1997.
12
Sourced from VIKSAT’s Publications
• S. Mudrakartha, P. Shome and V. Kaushal, Joint Forest Management in India: Spread, Performance and Impact
(New Delhi, Universities Press, 2004).
• S. Mudrakartha and Sujit G. Kumar, Joint Forest Management in Gujarat: A Status Report, (Ahmedabad, VIKSAT,
2002).
• Sujit G. Kumar and S. Mudrakartha, ‘Traditional and Modern JFM Institutions: Issues in Convergence’, VIKSAT-
AKF(I) Discussion Paper, December 2001.
• S. Mudrakartha and Sujit G. Kumar, ‘Conflict and Conflict Management in Joint Forest Management’, VIKSAT-
AKF(I) Discussion paper, March 2001.
• M. Bora and D. Bhalani, Joint Forest Management and Community Forestry in India: An Ecological and Institutional
Assessment (New Delhi, Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2000).
13
Source: Srinivas Mudrakartha (ed.), Joint Forest Management in Gujarat, A Status Report, Compiled & Presented
by: Sujit G. Kumar (Ahmedabad, VIKSAT, June 2002).
14
‘State Opens Banni for Commercial Feeding’, Indian Express, 5 August 2000.
15
Shyam Parekh, Gandabaval Set to Gobble Up Banni Grassland. (As above)
16
Gujarat Forest Department, Gujarat State Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and Action Plan.
17
5 bighas = 1 ha.
18
P.G. Vijaya Sherry Chand, Honey Bee, 6(2): 15 (1995), p. 31; Lyes Ferroukhi and Jitendra H. Suthar, Honey Bee,
5(2): 5-7 (1994), p. 34; Honey Bee, 10 (3): 10-11 (1999), p. 37.

state chapter - gujarat

 CCA/Gujarat/CS1/Sabarkantha/Malekpur/Protection of forests

Malekpur, Sabarkantha
Background
Malekpur in Bhiloda taluka of Gujarat is one of the oldest joint forest management (JFM) villages
in the area. This case study focuses on the ecological, economic, sustainability, equity and efficiency
impacts of community participation in forest resource management (officially recognised as JFM)
in the village, and also the institutional changes facilitated in the area towards community-based
forest management and its scaling-up.
The Jhanjharmata Vruksh Utpadan Sahkari Mandli Ltd (JVUSM) was set up by the people
of Malekpur village of Bhiloda taluka. Established in the year in 1984–5. Today it has a total
membership of 205, of which 170 are males and 35 females. The Dungri Garasia community of the
village have been protecting a total forest area of 163 hectares.

Towards community conservation

Until the early 1960s, the forest was under the direct supervision of the Vijaynagar jagirdar and
the villagers had little to do with the forest. They had no rights over it. Dry wood, leaves, fruits
and flowers in the forest were free for them, even though permission of the jagirdar was a must.
The threat of severe punishment for culprits resulted in the preservation of greenery in the region.
After 1960, the degradation of the forest began with the abolition of the jagirdari system. Most
of the trees were illegally cut by the jagirdars. For the tribal people, especially those in the lower
income group, the forest became a quick money-making source. It also led to large-scale timber
smuggling and sale of forest products, and soon the forests of the village were completely wiped
out. This had an impact on the overall economy of the area.
The Jhanjharmata mandli of Malekpur was one among the first few cooperatives to get registered
in 1986 (Registration no. Agri./2715 dated 12.8.1986) with the initiative of Shri. Siddhrajbhai
Solanki, a professor at Gujarat Vidyapith, and VIKSAT (a NGO working in the villages of Bhiloda
Taluka on issues related to enhancing people’s participation in natural resource management).
Initially 60 households (of the total 110 households) came forward to become members of the
cooperative. After the registration, the cooperative applied to the forest department (FD) for
the lease of the forest land. However, after two years, in 1988, the Ministry of Environment and
Forests, Government of India rejected this application under Forest Conservation Act, 1980.
During this period, the focus was on development of private land within the village through
various programmes like Vikas Bagh—small plots of horticultural and forestry species (in 800
sq m) to meet the primary needs of the tribal families for fuel, fodder and fruits. A fodder plan
was drawn out to get green fodder of pioneer jowar during the summer. 50% of the programme
cost was met by financial assistance from the Tribal Area Sub-Plan (TASP), Khedbrahma, and
the remainder was met by the people in the form of labour. A bio-gas programme was initiated
with financial assistance from the Himmatnagar centre of the Gujarat Agro-Industries Cooperation
Limited.
The protection efforts and rules for punishment were refined from time to time. As per one of the
provisions of Gujarat JFM order, the cooperative which undertakes afforestation work on its own or
with the financial assistance from non-state government agencies would be entitled to 80% of the
share of the final harvest. The JVUSM has resolved to avail of this provision and are not keen to
case studies - gujarat

get any assistance from the forest department. While the pros and cons of this provision are being
debated, the FD has shown less enthusiasm towards JVUSM. Now the provision has been changed
and in all cases the cooperative is still in dilemma as the final agreement between the JVUSM and
the FD remains unsigned.
Activities carried out by JVUSM: Out of 167 ha forest area , 45 ha was totally barren, on which
the FD carried out plantation. The remaining 122 ha of land had the potential for regeneration due
the presence of root stock. The cooperative initiated protection of forest in 1986; the area was
closed for open grazing and free cutting to facilitate regeneration. Today, the forests of Malekpur
have regenerated.

221
222 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Due to protection activities the people have also started getting benefits in terms of increased
fuel-wood supply, timru-leaf collection, and fodder-grass collection. Malekpur village has helped in
promoting JFM concept in other villages.

Figure 1: Regeneration of forests in Malekpur over time

Impacts of Forest Management in the Village

Ecological and Economic Impacts
A study on vegetation dynamics carried out in the village forests showed growth of 35 species, the
most dominant being teak, a valuable timber species. The six other major species were khakhra,
neem, timru, dhaman, garmala and umbiya.
The ecological changes could be perceived from the increase in production of timru and collection
of other gums from the forest. Collection of timru leaves has also seen a major increase in the past
several years.
The other ecological changes were a check on soil erosion, increase in ground water recharge,
increase in humus and soil fertility and standing biomass. Further, these ecological processes
have also improved habitat conditions, which now attract a variety of small mammals, birds, and
insects. The changing status of ecological conditions has shown an indirect positive influence on
agricultural productivity and animal husbandry, which is a significant source of livelihood for the
local tribals.
The protecting individuals have a deep concern for biodiversity, more so because they use a
range of forest produce from a large number of species. Edible flowers, fruits, leaves, roots etc.
form a part of their diet. Some edible items are also sold in the market to meet cash needs. Leaves
of forest species (Butea monosperma) are used to make leaf plates. Medicinal plants such as
safed musli are also used by the local people. Timru leaves and mahua are important sources of
income. To these tribal people, the NTFPs are a lifeline; they are usually collected for consumption,
home use and for sale. This vital link is reflected in the traditions and customs of tribal groups. In
 Gujarat 223

Malekpur, turnover from mahua and timru leaves grew six- and eightfold respectively. Similarly, the
production of fodder grass and fuelwood has been on the increase. This success can be attributed
to efficient protection by people, resulting in vigorous forest regeneration.

Box 1
Annual fuelwood collection mechanisms
In the initial years only dry and fallen twigs were permitted to be collected, but the problems
faced by the villagers in the availability of fuelwood forced the members to rethink this issue
and they evolved a plan to address it. The villagers made a general survey of the village forest
and, according to the density of the trees, they demarcated the forests into five different
zones. It was decided that the villagers will carry out cut-back and pruning activities in these
patches. One patch is selected every year and the materials harvested are distributed among
the members. Thus, as per the plan, the cutback and pruning activities were carried out in
the respective patches once in every five years. This has helped the villagers to gather more
fuelwood from the forest area. Members of the executive committee helped to supervise the
whole process and saw to it that the bigger trees were not cut in the process and only the
branches and other smaller twigs were harvested. Again the villagers formed themselves into
different groups and only one or two members from each group are allowed to carry the axe
into the forest area and carry out the actual harvesting, while the other members of the group
help in gathering and transporting the material out of the forest area. This process is carried
out every year and it is thus assured that all households of the village get equal access to
fuelwood. In the past two years the villagers have been able to harvest 4000 manns (1 mann
= 20 kg) of fuelwood from the JFM forest area. One portion of the fuelwood collected by each
of the groups is deposited with the cooperative, which then auctions the share to the highest
bidder (usually within the village). This helps the cooperative to earn some income and cover
some of their administrative costs.

Equity in participation and resource allocation

Equity became one of the major concerns after the initial few years of taking up protection. As open
grazing and entry into the forests for grass and firewood collection were stopped, women started
facing problems in meeting their firewood and fodder demands. To address this, the co-operative
society allotted a portion of the forest patch for collection of firewood and fodder. Further, as the
benefits from the forests started flowing in, the issue was to distribute them equitably among the
members. The panchyati raj institution ensures that all the members participate in grass collection
and cut-back operations on the dates specified for them and the product is shared on the basis of
the shareholding. It was ensured that the poor and landless families and especially women have a
voice not only in protection and management but also in decision making and benefit sharing.

Box 2
Fodder grass sharing mechanisms
The village committee evolved a unique system to regulate the harvest of fodder grass from the
JFM areas. Open grazing is banned and the grass is allowed to grow till the month of January
/February. Once the grass is ready for harvest, a meeting of the executive committee is called
and a date for the harvest of the grass is decided. The information is passed around in the
village. Subsequently the villagers form themselves into different groups (mostly comprising
close relatives). Generally 12 different groups are formed, each group having 10 members.
The executive committee members then conduct a general survey of the forest of the village to
case studies - gujarat

get a measure of the potential harvest possible and the growth of the grass across the various
patches of the forest. Then the total forest area is divided into 12 different patches. The denser
the growth of the grass, the smaller the area demarcated. Once the patches are identified, a
lottery system is adopted to allocate the 12 patches to the 12 groups. Each group appoints
its own leader, who helps to monitor the grass-harvesting procedure. Only one member from
each household can participate in the actual cutting of the grass. Thus during the harvesting
process, each member cuts the grass according to the time allotted (generally 2–3 hours) and
once the grass is harvested, other members from the household can come to help to gather
and prepare bundles of the grass harvested. Thus care is taken that the fodder harvested from
the forest is distributed equitably among the different households. The whole fodder harvesting
224 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

process lasts for 10–12 days depending upon the amount of grass. Every evening when the 12
groups collect the grass, one portion of the share is deposited in the account of the cooperative.
Thus everyday the cooperative gets a share of 40–50 bundles of grass. This grass is then sold
to the highest bidder (generally to farmers within the village). In this way the cooperative also
earns almost Rs 2000–3000 every year.

Conclusions
Certain changes in rights and privileges over forests, policies and laws pertaining to NTFPs,
working plans, silvicultural arrangements, etc. are desirable in JFM. The field officials are willing to
entrust protection to the communities, but hesitate in involving them in management and control
of government forests, thus reducing JFM to ‘I manage, you participate’, an attitude that needs to
be changed.

This case study has been provided by VIKSAT, in 2001

For more details contact:

Srininvas Mudrakartha,
VIKSAT, Nehru Foundation for Development,
Thaltej Tekka,, Ahmedabad-380054,
Gujarat
Tel: 079-6856220,079-6858007,079-6858009
Fax 079-6852360
Email: viksat@ad1.vsnl.net.in
 CCA/Gujarat/CS2/Vadodara/Kawant/Protection of forests

Kawant, Naswadi, Pavijetpur and Chhota Udaipur

region, Vadodara
Background
The Kawant region is located at 21°55’ to 22°27’ North latitude and 73°40’ to 74°03’ East longitude
in Vadodara District of Gujarat. The nearest road-head/rail-head is Vadodara, which is roughly 60
to 120 km away from the stretches of forests preserved by communities. The area is inhabited by
many communities, which include mainly the tribal communities belonging to Rathwa, Nayak, Bariya,
Kolcha koli and Bhil. The non-tribal communities are very few, mainly a few shopkeepers. This
region covers an area of 2400 sq km, of which 98 villages are conserving forests falling within their
traditional boundaries. These conserved stretches of forests range between 20 ha to 125 ha in area.
All the conserved forests are Reserved Forests under the Indian Forest Act, 1927. A few of the villages
of Pavi Jetpur taluka and their conserved forests are located near Ratanmahal Bear Sanctury.
The 1960s and 70s witnessed massive deforestation in Gujarat. The reasons for this destruction
were many, with the main one being clear-felling of forests by the forest department. Kawant,
Naswadi, Pavi Jetpur and Chhota Udaipur regions also faced rapid forest destruction during this
period. Within a short span of time, the available forests for the forest-dependent tribal communities
in this region were drastically reduced. Slowly the pressure on forests from the people mounted,
and whatever was left of the forests was finished by the 1980s. The immediate sufferers were
tribal communities living in forest areas. As Shankarbhai Rathwa, an elder tribal of Mundamor
village says, ‘On one occasion we did not even have two long logs to carry dead bodies and had to
pull out the logs from the hutments to burn dead bodies. This was a shock and we realized that if
we did not do something then we will have to see unknown but dire situations.’
As a response to general degradation the forest department also started tree plantation
programmes in the 70s. The planted forests were clear felled on a regular basis to earn revenue
for the Department. The communities were silent witnesses to the plantation drives carried out
by the forest department. For years, the department plantation drives have been stories of failed
plantations, corruption and wastage of forest resources. Villagers were keenly observing these
drives and analysing reasons for their failures.
In the meanwhile, throughout the entire tribal belt of the region, apart from facing day-to-day
hardships, tribal communities were facing a unique but serious problem of half-burnt dead bodies.
This led to social upheaval, and villagers began to look for ways of solving the problem.

Towards community conservation

Establishment of forest protection activities
Having witnessed the forest department plantation drives and analysed them, the villagers
strongly felt that plantations were not the solution to their problem. They also knew that the
seemingly barren hills and forest stretches were blossoming every year in the monsoon. They
realized that the forests of their village still had enough root stock, and if the natural sprouting
of each year is protected form grazing and immediate consumption, then it would be possible to
regenerate the forests like in the past. But this simple realization was not easy to implement.
Everyone in the community had faced the difficulties equally, but even then it was not easy to
reach a consensus on the solution.
case studies - gujarat

In most villages, when some villagers initiated conversations about protecting forests for future
use, the sceptics within the community would strongly oppose the idea. One of the major points of
contention was the fact that the forests were legally owned by the government. After a few years of
simultaneous discussions within many villages, a few villages like Usela and Patadia overcame the
impasse around 1983 and took a courageous initiative to protect naturally grown monsoon forests.
Initially, the villagers received cooperation from the forest department. The villagers evolved rules
of use, protection and community penal provisions for breach of rules. They arranged for day-and-
night surveillance of forests by teams from within the village. This entire movement was strongly
supported and encouraged by a local social worker, Shri Harivallabh Bhai Parikh. He appreciated
the people’s initiative, sensed its potential and backed the community momentum. Shri Parikh also
225
226 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

inspired many other neighbouring villagers to join this conservation movement.

As the forests of Patadia and Usela villages, which started protection activities first, began to
regenerate, this massage reached beyond the neighbouring villages to faraway villages and across
the area. Slowly a movement picked up in about 90 villages.
The major stumbling blocks that the villagers were faced with were the fact that the forest
department owned the forests and that some villagers were questioned about their right to protect
the forests. Additionally, some disgruntled elements within the villages often joined hands with
some forest staff and made it difficult for the protecting villagers. Dealing with the strong timber
mafia and lack of support from the forest department often led to frustration. In some villages,
however, villagers did receive cooperation from the forest officials.

Establishment of the joint forest management programme

The informal community initiative had inherent weaknesses, particularly the fact that the villagers
had no sustained assistance and guidance in hours of need. In 1992, the state government of
Gujarat adopted the joint forest management (JFM) programme. The programme, as elsewhere
in the country, was aimed at regeneration of degraded forests with the help of local people, while
sharing any benefits from these forests with the local people. People of the area, with the help of
NGOs, started to institutionalise their forest protection efforts under JFM. However, JFM did not
succeed in this region, mainly because of faulty implementation. Many villages were stuck with
the process of registration of their cooperatives, as the forest department did not help them in the
process. At state level or at local level there was no pressure to force the forest department to
implement the JFM policy in its true letter and spirit. The NGOs involved were also working to help
implement the programme more as a project rather than as a long-term process of participatory
forest management. Many of these NGOs lost interest in the programme once the funds were
exhausted with the department.
Overall, the rights envisaged under the JFM program over the conserved forests were not visible
to the villagers. The communities were not sure that they would ultimately get at least 50 per cent
of the benefits that would accrue once the regenerated timber was harvested as envisaged under
JFM. In many villages where people seized wood from the smugglers the department refused to
grant 50 per cent partnership over such material. At many places, when the regular pruning of
the forests was done, the products were not shared with the villagers. Even the wood fallen in
rain and storm was not allowed to be shared with communities. Getting nearly nothing from the
forests, not even to meet their daily requirements, after years of protection was again frustrating
and discouraging for the villagers.
Despite opposition from the villagers, the forest department undertook plantations in the forests
being protected by the local villagers. This was the final straw that made villagers extremely
apprehensive and distrustful of the forest department. At the community level, the disgruntled
elements that were against conservation became stronger. Now they could claim with confidence
that government cannot and shall not part with forest resources. At many places, the local forest
department personnel joined hands with such disgruntled elements and encouraged them to
frustrate community conservation forces.
Ultimately, there was a slowdown in conservation efforts, and the momentum was on the decline.
A few villages witnessed severe setbacks and the regrown forests once again turned barren. In
many villages, however, the momentum was not affected by negative feedback and they continued
to preserve their forests.

Current status
Arch Vahini, an NGO, has been closely associated with livelihood and development issues of tribal
communities in the tribal pockets of Vadodara, Narmada and Dharampur districts of Gujarat. When
some members of the NGO witnessed this decline in the momentum towards forest protection,
they decided to intervene. Their objective was to stop further decline of the conservation initiative
and to revitalise the community initiative where it had gone down. Arch Vahini started its work by
studying and understanding the existing efforts of conservation. Subsequently, they began their
work on community-based conservation and management of forests.
Arch Vahini’s experience in last few years shows that there is an increasing shift in the attitude
of tribal people in this area. There have been many demands for vantalavdis (forest tanks) from
the villages, particularly for wildlife in regenerating forests. There seems to be a sense of belonging
and concern and responsibility towards the forests that they have been protecting and the wildlife
within them.
 Gujarat 227

After 2–3 years of sustained interactions with the villagers, the villagers are assured of critical
inputs when required. Consequently the local meetings are yielding higher results. There is a new
enthusiasm among some villagers towards forest protection. However, there are still many doubts
and impediments because of past disappointments and frustrations. There is a lot that still needs
to be achieved but Arch Vahini is hopeful.

Opportunities and constraints

Like in the past, Arch Vahini is also facing constraints because of the forest department. The
government has initiated a well-intentioned scheme called the Forest Development Authority
(FDA). Under this scheme all the funds meant for forest development within a district come directly
to the FDA. The FDA has the authority to disburse the funds directly to the village institutions
for management and development of forests. Although the intention is good, here again the
implementation is faulty. The FDA is mandated to establish new local institutions rather than
accepting the ones that the village communities have established and that have been working
towards forest conservation. This is unfortunate as people’s enterprises/efforts carried out on
a massive scale are not only not recognised but are systematically undermined. The forest
department, instead of recognising and authorising the local people’s endeavour, is bypassing and
creating parallel trusts and legal arrangements. This would dampen local inhabitants’ motivation
and initiative.

Impacts of community effort

Despite all this, the strong will, determination and hard labour of people has won, at least in
relation to forest regeneration. Once again the forests are live and the hills are green. Forest
regeneration has been good and local communities have benefited from the regenerating forests.
Immediately in the first year of conservation, they could get fodder for cattle and dead and fallen
wood as fuel. After 5-6 years of preservation they could get wood for agricultural implements and
for home repair. They could now also collect minor forest produce.
The quality of the regenerated forest differed depending on the quality of protection accorded
to it by the concerned villagers. Villagers recount the return of many varieties of birds along with
hares, jackals, macaques, hyenas and different kinds of reptiles. Peacocks, now in plenty in these
forests, were according to the local people never found in this region earlier. Similarly mammals
like nilgai and reptiles like pythons have also been reportedly seen for the first time now in many
villages.

Conclusions
To conclude, it is regretful that the state mishandled the gigantic community initiative. If the
community efforts had been recognized legally and nurtured with care, then the region would
definitely have became a hotspot of community-initiated forestry. The JFM Vadodara model would
have been inspirational not only for tribals of the state but across the country. Nevertheless, for
the people it is not a lost opportunity, as they are bouncing back and would continue their efforts
to strive for rights over forests, including rights over timber.

This case study has been contributed by Rajesh Mishra, Arch Vahini in 2007.

For more details contact:

Rajesh Mishra
case studies - gujarat

ARCH Vahini
Soni Street, Kawant,
District Vadodara, 391170
Gujarat
Tel: 9426125617; (02669) 254448 (R); (02669) 250140 (O)
Email: arch.rajesh@gmail.com
Himachal Pradesh
Community conserved areas in Himachal Pradesh:
Myths and reality
Virinder Sharma

Author’s note
The reconstruction of rural social ecology is not a simple matter. A ‘landholding elite’ was a far
less significant factor in the landscape of the Himachal Pradesh region of the western Himalayas
than, say, the Kathmandu region of the Nepal Himalayas. The rulers of local hill kingdoms rarely
if ever restricted their subjects’ access to the common resources of the mountain forests. The
history of forest exploitation in the South Asian subcontinent emerged in the early 1980s as the
leading aspect of its embryonic environmental history studies. For a decade analysis centred on
the extraction of timber by the colonial and post-colonial state and its commercial allies, and social
conflicts which resulted from that systems’ challenge to the traditional rights of village communities.
The imperial system has been seen largely in terms of timber cutting and commercially oriented
silviculture and village-level resistance has been seen primarily as a defence of grazing and timber
rights.
However, these discussions have tended to be shaped by the colonial system’s own frame
of reference: they have been silent on a wide variety of community conservation systems and
practices/areas, which have been vital to both the diversity of natural areas and the subsistence
systems of the people of the forest. In sum, fragmentary evidence suggests several conclusions.
One is that in areas of mixed settled farming and forest gathering the colonial state, in its attempts
to regulate natural resources, penetrated the rhythms of daily life to a very limited extent.
In a democratic state a popularly elected government is undeniably the authority upon which
the control of ‘common property’ ultimately rests. Unlike in the case of an absolutist system,
therefore, control in a democracy should originate in the first instance at the local level, not be
granted from above. As things stand at present, the struggle seems to be more in the nature of
subordinate institutions attempting to wrest a greater say in local issues from the tight-fisted upper
echelons of power. The paradox is evident. Under the rajas and for much of the colonial period,
‘common property’ as we understand it today may not have existed, but the appropriation of
natural resources could only be carried out through the mediation and participation of the common
herders and farmers. In independent India the idea of ‘common property’ is much stronger but
access to and control over the management of its resources by local bodies is probably far more
limited than it has ever been before.

1. Background
1.1. Importance of conservation in Himachal Pradesh
state chapter - himachal pradesh

The Himachal region comprises some of the country’s richest ecosystems. This
is due to extreme altitudinal variations and concurrent ranges in temperature
and precipitation, which combine to create a diverse ecosystem of habitats and
species.
Mountain areas in general and the Himalayas specifically are considered
storehouses of endemic and endangered species.
Conservation concern has so far been focused on lowland tropical rain forests.
Mountain wildlands are, however, equally important storehouses of biological
wealth, as the lowlands have been hugely altered by communal agriculture,
industry and urban settlement.

1.2. Ecological profile

Himachal Pradesh can be broadly divided into three major vegetation zones.
Table 1 indicates the predominant vegetation zones in the state.
231
232 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Table 1: Vegetation zones in Himachal Pradesh

No. of grasses
Zone Elevation
and legumes

A. Sub-tropical zone (foothills, valleys, and

<1000m to 2100 m 33
mid hills)

B. Humid/sub temperature zone (high hills) 2100-3200m 38

C. Dry temperate and alpine zone > 3200m 26

The state encompasses a wide variety of natural and artificial water systems. These lakes or
wetlands are spread across the various ecological zones, from the sub-tropical to trans-Himalayan
regions, ranging from 400 to 5000 m in altitude.
Natural wetlands mainly comprise lakes and ponds, whereas human-made wetlands are reservoirs,
constructed for irrigation or hydroelectricity generation.

1.3. Socio-economic profile

The Paharis or hill people are known for their simplicity. Although beset by developmental changes
today, one can still appreciate the traditional hospitality of the paharis (hill people). Diverse
ethnic groups, which have developed their own culture based on available natural resources, also
characterise Himachal, giving rise to a cultural diversity on par with levels of biodiversity found
in the region. Regulated interactions between the mountain people and their environment helped
maintain the richness of species, communities and genetic material, in both local farming systems
and wildlife.1 This has resulted in detailed indigenous knowledge systems of resource strategising,
exemplified by diverse farming systems, the use of minor forest products and the richness of
cultivars and land races of mountain crops. People of the cold desert zone (Kinnaur, Lahaul,
Spiti, Chamba and Pangi) generally earn a living by rearing sheep and selling forest produce.
The people of the higher hills depend mainly on agriculture and animal husbandry, supplemented
by income from the sale of gucchhi and banaksha. Residents of the foothills cultivate opium in
addition to traditional crops, while the people in the lower valleys depend mainly on daily labour
and agriculture. Fruit trade (in apple, kiwi, pomegranate, papaya, guava, etc.) in the markets of
Amritsar, Lahore, Peshawar and Delhi also forms an important source of income. Wool is spun
to prepare hand-woven shawls called dohru or pattu as protection for cold winters. The hides of
sheep are used to prepare bags for storage of foodgrains. Prior to the 1930s, people lived in joint
families in small and scattered villages. The more the members of a family, the more prosperous
it was considered. The wealth of a farmer continues to be measured by his possession of animals.
A majority of the population is still dependent on agriculture. In earlier days, favoured crops were
maize, paddy, barley, lesser millets like koda, bathu, ogea, phapra, kangni or foxtail millet, china,
and pulses like moong or mash, masar or masoor, and kulatih or horse gram.
Increasing populations have intensified pressures on forests, which have been felled indiscriminately
in the recent past. With increasing literacy and the subsequent search for government jobs, few
people choose to continue with traditional livelihoods. In many instances, only old people are left
in villages and they find it increasingly difficult to rear cattle.

A typical village in Himachal Pradesh Photo: Ashish

Kothari
 Himachal Pradesh 233

2. A brief history of administrative control over land and

resources
Discussions on the human use of ecological resources in pre-colonial times must be very tentative,
since no systematic study has yet been carried in this mountain region. Much therefore must be
speculation, based in part on the survival, long into the colonial era, of earlier adaptation and
extraction systems. The social dimension largely concerns the customary law of common property
systems and collective patterns of use of non-timber resources. In Himachal Pradesh a key distinction
must be made between settled farming systems and tribal hunter-gatherer systems. Over an era
approaching two thousand years, Hindu farmer castes gradually expanded their settlements and
terraced agriculture up the alluvial soils of the region’s many river valleys. Hill peasants practised
mixed cropping systems on terraces, primarily for local use but to a limited degree for monetary
regional markets as well. In principle, ownership of all lands, including arable lands, lay with the hill
rajas, but in practice the peasants generally inherited the use of their terraces down generations,
and landholding was distributed relatively equitably, with far less presence of a landholding elite
as compared to many parts of lowland India.
A brief review of history seems to suggest that the ‘customary’ management of the natural
resources by the so-called ‘village community’ was not an undisputed fact in the region. Nor were
the colonial rulers, from the very beginning, keen on obtaining complete and exclusive control over
the resources of all non-arable areas. Many of the officials, in fact, felt that ‘by including the forests
in mauza (local term for habitation) boundaries and “partially assigning” them to the landholders
of the mauza, the village officials and village communities would be induced and compelled to look
after the forests and pay the rakhas or watchmen’.2 This hesitation of the British to stake a larger
claim is explained by the fact that forest conservation initially had lower priority than the extension
of cultivation.
Attitudes towards land (as property and as a means of livelihood) changed over time. So did
the interpretations of its ‘ownership’. Initially, much seems to have rested upon the British
administrators’ perception of the nature of land rights and what they regarded as the ‘traditional’
land ownership structure. In areas of Himachal that came under direct colonial rule, the government
proclaimed itself the inheritor of the privileges and authority of the traditional rulers who had been
dispossessed. In order to justify the unprecedented powers that they now began to claim, the
British administrators probably exaggerated the powers that the pre-colonial rajas had enjoyed.
By this manipulation the new rulers were able to lay claim to greater authority than the earlier
rulers had ever been able to actually assert, even if their powers were theoretically extensive and
normally acknowledged by the peasantry.
This was of much significance for the region because the Himachal hill states ultimately came to
be viewed rather differently from the other agrarian areas of the north Indian plains. To be fair to
the early revenue settlement officers, they may have been justified in taking such a position. They
were inclined to compare the political structure of the princely states of Himachal with that which
prevailed in Europe under feudalism. This seems to have formed the basis of their subsequent
understanding regarding the respective claims that the ruler and his subjects had on the land and
its produce. The early British administrators in Himachal had to face several difficult questions.
Who owned the village ‘wastes’? Was there a ‘village community’? What were the rights of the
cultivators on uncultivated land around their farms?
British administrators certainly encouraged amongst the peasants of a village the emergence of a
state chapter - himachal pradesh

co-proprietorship in the smaller ‘wastes’. But there was a hidden set of implications in this. By giving
the shape of a property to the de facto control of peasants over the village ‘wastes’, the British,
it seems, sought to establish for themselves an exclusive and absolute control over the resources
of the larger non-arable areas and forests. A clear-cut demarcation of ‘ownership’ carried out in
these terms undoubtedly gave to the agriculturists a more definite authority over their immediate
environs. It simultaneously allowed the colonial rulers to put forward a proprietary claim of a
corresponding nature on the larger expanse of uncultivated area. This seemed to carry with it the
implicit understanding that the domains of the state and the peasant had been differentiated in
so far as the use of natural resources was concerned. Theoretically his subjects did not seriously
dispute the claim of the raja over such resources in earlier times. In reality, however, he was
probably unable to even procure them without the latter’s mediation. The rulers and the ruled did
not operate in mutually exclusive proprietary fields.
Having virtually prompted the emergence of a clearer sense of property in the village wastes
amongst the peasantry, the British administration seems to have moved in the direction of
creating clearer notions of individual ‘proprietorship’. Undeniably the emphasis here has been
on the changing relationship between the peasants and the state over the question of the village
234 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

‘wastes’. This is because the latter category of land has become the focus of attention amongst
environmentalists and is today the source of much contention. The debate on ‘common property
resources’ in its present form has its origins in the uncertainty that prevailed for long over the
control and management of these ‘wastes’. One need hardly clarify that the term ‘waste’ is, in
fact, itself a misnomer: these were the most important pieces of land from which ‘resources’
could be exploited and there were few other such areas around the village which were of such
immense utility! Yet it might be somewhat of an exaggeration to argue, as many scholars have
done, that the ‘village community’ and not the state was the undisputed master of this land in pre-
colonial times. The right to make use of the resources of wastelands was very closely tied to the
peasants’ obligations towards the state. The one was incomplete without the other and both were
the products of a particular historical stage.
To make the analysis more complicated, the western Himalayas were administratively complex:
large areas outside the British districts were left as intact ‘Princely Hill States’. These States
tended to maintain older forms of discretionary management more nearly intact until they were
administratively absorbed into independent India in 1947. But most of them, under diplomatic
pressure from the British, gradually adopted approximations of the British forest management
system. The effect of this on management of non-timber products is even more uncertain than for
the districts of British India, but some indication can be gained from the Forest Rules, which the
Chamba and Bashahr states adopted by 1900. These rules stated that Reserved Forests would be
under the direct control of a British Forest Conservator appointed by the raja, whereas Unreserved
Forests were under the raja’s control. In the Reserved Forests the villagers had rights only to building
timber, fodder grass and fuelwood. In the raja’s forests, villagers had rights to the collection and
sale of dry and fallen timber and inferior trees for fuel, grass, wild animals, birds, honey, wax, fruit
and flowers, taking care that such collection is effected in such a manner as not to injure the forest.
In sum, both British India and the Princely States under Western hegemony experienced a trend
toward managed forest ecosystems, with an accommodation between European and traditional
systems of use.
In his revenue settlement report on Kangra, Lyall wrote, ‘The Raja was not, like a feudal king,
lord paramount over inferior lords of manors, but rather as it were, manorial lord of his whole
country. Each principality was a single estate.’ This basic position seems to have been recorded in
all the later land revenue documents of this period, which are too numerous to be all mentioned
here. As a result virtually all the works based upon these records have unquestioningly adopted
a similar line. Admittedly, many of the rights that the rajas came to exercise were very much like
those enjoyed by actual proprietors.
This naturally would have far-reaching implications for the idea of ‘common property resources’.
But it does not mean that the rajas had always been able to assert these
rights. The increasing British presence in the area must have had its
impact.
The reinterpretation of the political economy of the hill states by the
British, keeping their own interests in the forefront, was responsible
for bringing about very important changes. It also provided the rajas
with the justification and means of accessing natural resources directly
instead of through peasants and pastoralists.
Quite evidently, the notion of property prior to the coming of the
British was very different from what it subsequently came to mean. If
this was the case with regard to ‘valuable’ agricultural land, the idea
of a ‘common property resource’ in the ‘wastes’ and the forests can
hardly be perceived as a straightforward matter. To a considerable
extent the rights of peasants to ‘common property resources’ were
in the nature of ‘users’, not ‘owners’. These rights were, moreover,
linked to their position both as members of a village community
and as proprietors of agricultural land. Their unequal position in the
latter situation, in particular, may have led to resulting inequalities
in their access to resources.
About the village ‘wastes’ and other adjoining uncultivated land,
some confusion still prevails. It is often suggested that prior to the
colonial intervention in the hills, village communities owned and
regulated the use of wastes and forests as ‘common property resources’.
In this context it has been argued that the British administrators
encouraged and brought about a change from a collective to individual
use of forest resources. It has, therefore, been suggested that during
 Himachal Pradesh 235

the early years of British rule the cohesion of India’s village communities was destroyed and along
with them their control over ‘common property resources’.
It is these assumptions that finally bring us to the question of whether there ever existed an idea
of ‘common property resources’ (or community conserved areas). To begin with, were uncultivated
wastes near villages ‘owned’ or ‘managed’ by village communities in pre-colonial times? This may
certainly have been the case in many other parts of India, but Himachal was, probably, not one
of them. Consider some of the 10th- and 11th-century land grants made by the rajas of Chamba
to certain individuals: the conferred rights included ‘... grass, grazing and pasture-land, with
fallow land ingress and egress together with gardens and resting places...’ There are references to
officials being specifically instructed to not cut the grantee’s pasture or seize his wood, fuel, grass,
chaff, etc. Individual beneficiaries of these grants, therefore, almost exclusively utilised the ‘waste’
adjoining the cultivated land. There is no mention whatsoever of either the ‘village community’ or
of its control over ‘common property’. The transfer of rights seems to have taken place straight
from the state to the individual. It comes as no surprise therefore, to find that British officials who
attempted to understand the nature of rights in village ‘wasteland’ during the early years of British
rule often arrived at conflicting conclusions.
In principle the claim of the raja to the ownership of the ‘wastes’ was normally never challenged.
There were many occasions on which he very clearly asserted it. This claim, nevertheless, co-
existed with certain rights of the peasantry, which were close to being proprietary, albeit in a
manner that was not entirely in conformity with modern market rationality.
By making some broad divisions we may be able to better appreciate the individuals and
institutions that were involved.
There was, to begin with, the interaction between the ruler and the village communities wherever
such communities existed. At the next administrative or territorial level were the different villages.
Finally, within the village, of course, were the claims made by individual peasants on the wastes
of their respective villages. In so far as different villages were concerned, the recognition of an
essential distinction between cultivated and uncultivated areas was initially intended to be more ‘an
internal frontier between cultivated and uncultivated land than as a boundary with the neighbouring
villages’.3 It was perhaps only with increasing pressure on village wastes that it became necessary
to demarcate the territories of villages.

2.1. The pre-colonial setting

Around 2000 BC, it appears that extensive forest cover, interspersed with grasslands, dominated
this region of the Shivalik and outer Himalayan tracts. Grasslands were sustained by natural
factors like isolation, slope, aspect, landslips, natural fires and erosion.4 Human settlements and
agricultural activities were at a minimum, concentrated mostly along fertile river valleys. Hill
regions were divided into small states ruled by local rajas. Arable land was under the control of
settlers, while all pastures and forests were under the raja’s dominion, and maintained mostly in
the form of hunting reserves. Lands were gifted by the rajas to their courtiers or in exchange for
military services to the state. Local grazing rights were granted to the villagers.
The raja’s proprietary claims did not readily translate into unrestricted control. Nor would he have
had any use of such control before the appearance of a market with global colonial dimensions. An
important distinction needs to be made at this point between the ownership of land on the one hand
state chapter - himachal pradesh

and the resources it possessed on the other. When during the pre-British period the state claimed
ownership of all unenclosed waste, the cultivators had ‘rights of use’ (bartan) on it. Amongst the
most common of these was the right to pasture their livestock, to cut grass and tree leaves for
fodder, and to obtain dry fuelwood for everyday use. Not only were these activities important for
the village economy, they were also, ultimately, factors that contributed to the income of the state
in the form of both agricultural and non-agricultural taxes. Some other benefits that the peasants
enjoyed with the permission of the local officials were to cut wood for house construction, for
making farm implements, for marriages and funerals, etc. Barnes5 drew up a list of such rights and
by the late 19th century these had been widely recognised even by British administrators.
The co-proprietorship in wasteland resources by the landowners did not erase the original
distinction between the ownership of land and the utilization of its resources. But the order of
things was somewhat altered. Even while the khewatdars (agricultural landowners) of a village
became co-proprietors of the wastelands the State remained ‘... the proprietor of forest or wild-
growing trees in wasteland’.6 In forests—that is, in wasteland more or less covered with wild trees
or bush—the state and the landholders therefore had separate properties, neither of which were
free, for the property of the state in the trees was subject to the right of the state to preserve
trees.
236 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

It would be proper to refer to natural resources that were appropriated (by peasants and
pastoralists alike) from the vast expanse of forests and non-arable land that lay beyond the
economic sphere of agricultural areas. The inability of the pre-colonial timber market to penetrate
into many distantly located areas made timber extraction the least of the mountain peasant’s
concerns. Even if such a market had developed on a wide scale—as was the case in later British
times—it is unlikely that they would have been successfully able to stake a proprietary right over
timber. There is equally little to suggest that the peasantry, even under colonialism, ever came
to regard timber in the forests as a ‘common property resource’. With regard to the other natural
produce of non-agricultural land, there were no restrictions on appropriation. But this did not mean
that the state did not come into the picture. On the contrary it could, and did, impose a wide range
of cesses on resources obtained from these lands. Such appropriation, in fact, contributed to state
income and was an important means by which the state’s proprietary right over uncultivated areas
was converted into tangible wealth. Free access to, and the procurement of, such resources by the
inhabitants did not inevitably signify a ‘common proprietary’ claim. Here the consent of the raja
was implicit because the resources thus obtained were liable to whatever kind of taxation the state
may have periodically thought proper.
This administrative pattern was not affected during the Mughal, Sikh or short Gorkha rule in these
hill states, because the local rajas continued to exercise their influence throughout (1600–1800
AD) The Sikhs extracted revenue from the rajas and used timber for urban and military expansion
in the nearby plains, while the Gorkhas plundered the hill states for money, leaving many deserted
villages. Before the arrival of the British, the hill rajas exercised control over the forest lands and
regulated hunting. The common person was prohibited by ritual, religious and other means from
hunting. Rajas established game reserves, enforced a closed season and restricted hunting, on the
basis of social hierarchy, to his courtiers and the military elite. The British government stepped
into this system of managing ‘minor forest produce’ and for the most part does not seem to have
altered it in any significant manner.

2.2. British forest administration

The Gorkhas were ejected in 1815 and the Sikhs in 1849 by the British, who then took control of
Mandi, Kulu, Lahaul and Kangra and supervised the Shimla hill states. The Revenue Department
followed, and the district administration was asked to survey arable land, demarcate forest and
regulate rights on arable, forest and pasture land. The Barnes settlement for Kangra District in
1862 instigated the transfer of ownership of arable land and pastures to villagers against tax
collection, and delineated large grazing tracts as village commons. British revenue officials moved
into lower Himachal and began surveys of the forest wealth of the outer Himalayas. From then
on, their primary interest lay in the commercial and revenue potential of a few species of timber
trees, plus a few other species such as bamboo which could be marketed on a large scale. But forty
years later, at the time of the founding of the colonial Forest Service, it was already conventional
to relegate all other botanical resources to the category of ‘Minor Forest Products’. Minor, that is,
in monetary terms, though by no means minor in the range and diversity of biological species or
their human uses for rural subsistence and some trade.
With the setting up of the Forest Service in 1865, forest policy was pronounced in order to
demarcate sal and deodar forests, which were to be used in the expansion of the North Western
Railway. The Forest Act (1878)7 was formulated after experimenting with and revising the policy
framed in 1855, which had recognised the fact that protection of soil and water resources, especially
in the headwater areas of hill forests, was crucial to a sustained yield of deodar. Forests were
categorised as Reserved when under the forest department (no local rights), Protected (with some
local rights); Un-classed and Private (with villages or people).
Reserved Forests were to be managed primarily to protect the natural forest or to
produce commercial timber. Protected Forests were intended to provide for local
resource needs. Thus, for non-timber forest products, the Reserved Forests
should in principle preserve the under-storey in all its variety, while in the
Protected Forests the District Forest Officers and their Rangers would ideally
monitor the availability of minor products, encourage their optimal growth,
regulate their harvest and sale, and collect duties for the government.
Shamlat lands or village commons were controlled by the villagers alone.
In the Punjab hills the arduous, time-consuming effort of reviewing actual
patterns of forest use, codifying them and thereby implicitly establishing
a social philosophy was finally settled in the last years of the 1800s, in a
series of Forest Settlements for each administrative jurisdiction. In order to
 Himachal Pradesh 237

establish administrative uniformity and expedite the otherwise endless

work, officers came to adopt similar lists of villager’s rights in the forest,
but with significant variations from one jurisdiction to another. These
lists reveal a social and economic ideology which attempted to allow
villagers to maintain both material subsistence and religious ritual. At the
same time the regulations were designed to severely and systematically
restrict the harvest of forest products for sale or monetary profit.
Continued traffic in plumage and skins saw the replacement of the 1887
Act by the Wild Birds and Animals Protection Act of 1912. This provided
for a ban on sale of scheduled fauna in the closed season as well as the
creation of sanctuaries and shooting by permit only. Basically this helped
in the preservation of game and restricted hunting access. The 1912
Act covered only areas under British rule at that time. (Kangra, Kulu,
Mandi, Sirmaur, Lahaul Spiti) and the other hill states had independent
rules. The latter were next to be governed by the 1924 Shikar Rules as
far as hunting was concerned. By 1920 unanimous opinion was shifted
from game to wildlife, from sport to camera, and from preservation to Ibex males, Spiti Photos: Yash
conservation. Veer Bhatnagar & Charu Mishra

The Punjab Wild Birds and Wild Animals Protection Act of 1933 provided for stringent regulations
and drew up four schedules of fauna in the hill states. A ban was imposed on hunting, snaring and
netting, although single-barrel guns were allowed for crop protection, and protected areas were
set up.

2.3. Impact of the freedom struggle on resource use

In 1921 the non-cooperation campaign led by Mahatma Gandhi caught up with the hill people,
who finally gave vent to their discontent against restrictive forest laws, mainly by burning the
forests. The Whyndham Commission, appointed in 1922, recommended the transfer of new
Reserve Forests from the jurisdiction of the forest department to the revenue department, as
common village lands. However a new Forest Act, adopted in 1927, gave more powers to the forest
department in the management of both Reserve Forests and Protected Forests.

2.4. The post-independence period

With independence the resettlement of refugees (as a result of partition) required additional land
in the fertile river valleys. The First Five-Year Plan (1951–6) placed most emphasis on industry,
urbanization and power generation. The Revenue and Agriculture Departments were most active,
and their activities led to increased conversions of forested land. Private forests could no longer
act as a buffer zone for the Reserve Forests, as these were already depleted or cultivated. Colonial
forest management, which had been aimed at maximum timber harvest for the requirements of
the railway, the wars and the expanding infrastructure of the Empire, changed little by way of the
administrative set-up in post-Independence Himachal.
By 1950, Indian Board for Wildlife, National Parks Act and various region-/state-specific wildlife
protection acts were formulated. Inadequate wildlife staff, a strictly commercial approach to
forestry, the expanding road network and access to crop protection guns led to another phase of
state chapter - himachal pradesh

indiscriminate hunting in the 1960–80 period. The Wild Life Protection Act of 1972 reviewed the
whole position and was followed by a total shooting ban in Himachal Pradesh from 1983–4, and
the creation of more wildlife sanctuaries and national parks.
Summing up these events, it appears that the period from around 1800 to 1870 was a phase of
forest exploitation and indiscriminate hunting, led largely by the British and military explorers. The
period 1870 to 1900 saw regulated hunting and forestry by the British with the exclusion of local
people. The period 1900 to 1920 saw the preservation of game for elite hunting and protection
forestry, while the period 1920–1947 saw the British conservation phase. The post-independence
period saw commercial forestry and Indian elite hunting up to 1960, after which indiscriminate
hunting took over. A real conservation phase began only in the 1980s.

3. Origins of community conservation

A heavy dependence on nature is usually complimented by the development of local systems
prudent in the use of scarce resources. The landscape of Himachal is dotted with several examples
238 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

of such systems, where local populations have devised mechanisms centred around sustainable
use and an opposition to commercial/external pressure. While sustainability as an objective of
such initiatives needs to be reviewed, we need to look critically at these efforts from the point of
view of equity and perceptions of communities towards nature and conservation.
In the following sections, I explore the mechanisms behind four such systems, three of which are
essentially community-driven (sacred elements, herb collection and rotational grazing) and one
initiated by government intervention (Forest Cooperative Societies, first established in Himachal
in 1935).

3.1. Some elements in community conservation

3.1.1. Sacred elements and conservation
Several plant and animal species (such as the peepal and khejadi trees, the Indian
peafowl and Hanuman langur) are revered in traditional belief systems. Instances
of communities protecting sacred tanks attached to temples, declaring sacred
pools along certain stretches of rivers or protecting entire groves of trees abound
in Himachal Pradesh. The Upper Beas region has maintained several sacred sites.
Most villages in Kullu and Seraj have ancient temples dedicated to local gods and
goddesses (devtas and devis). Some temples were within the villages, while others
were sited on prominent locations in the forest. The gods’ homes were constructed
of stone and deodar timber, most of them in similar style to human homes. Largely
part of folk tradition, such systems appear to have been maintained in cohesive,
relatively homogeneous communities by fears of the wrath of supernatural powers
following violation.
A quick reconnaissance of the two sub-divisions of Shimla District revealed that
all the villages have a village deity (gram devta) and one to many trees dedicated
to the deity. In most villages, a single individual of either deodar or some other
species was found. If only a single tree is considered sacred, felling is not permitted
even for repairs/construction of the temple. If more than one tree is sacred, felling
may be permitted with acquiescence of the village deity, but only for use in the temple.
Our study in the Shimla District revealed that all sacred groves are located in ‘mixed
forests’, as such providing greater economic services (fuel wood, fodder, etc.) and
ecological services (prevention of soil erosion, maintenance of diverse habitat for
different species, nutrient cycling, moisture retention etc.) than pure-stand forests.
Sacred groves are the only remnants of tree vegetation in many parts of Himachal
Pradesh and they serve critical functions as sources of fuel, litter, fodder, etc. They are
also richer in number of plant species than other stages of succession, and contain some
plant species that are totally absent from their surroundings.
Sacred elements linked village life with the outside world. One of the means by which a raja
could legitimise his claim to territory was by making gifts to the village devtas: by the late 1800s,
a seventh of all cultivated land in Kullu was granted as temple endowments.
The following common features characterize sacred groves in Himachal:
• All forms of vegetation in the grove are under protection of the deity of that grove.
• Boundaries are definite even if surrounded by forests.
• They are situated some distance away from human settlements.
Our analysis shows that religion played by far the more dominant role in the establishment
of sacred groves as compared to ecological considerations. While economic considerations had
little to do with maintaining sacred groves in the past, today people have realised their economic
potential.

3.1.2. Institutional mechanisms in sacred conservation systems

Sacred groves are situated on rent-free land and functioning is supported by one or more pujaris
(priests),8 a manager (kardar), an oracle or shaman, interpreters (chelas), and several musicians.
All these positions are hereditary. Taxes are extracted by the raja, through the manager; and
include items of produce as well as forest products for use in sacred festivals. For meeting the
expenses of dhup deep, the first grains produced at harvest and the first ghee from cows is offered
by villagers to the local deity.
 Himachal Pradesh 239

Some pastures seem to be vested with local deities: one respondent (Jaichand of Grahan
village, Manikaran) claims to pay royalty to Ashpuri Devi of Sharan as the pasture that he grazes
(Lahulibhati) belongs to her.
Despite a rigid caste society, lower castes are free to approach the devta for justice if they feel
slighted, abused or maltreated by the upper castes. The devta’s verdict, once announced, was
binding on all concerned.
Interventions are sought for the general well-being of the village community, for the benefit of
good crops, healthy cattle, warding off disease and to fight evil spirits that weaken the village as
a whole. These interventions are controlled by a form of ‘spirit possession’ called Khel. The chosen
human is called the devaan through most of Shimla, while further east, in the Rampur area, he is
referred to as the for or mali.
Frequently, a line of ants moving out of old temple sites has indicated a new site by marking
a limiting square at the new site. Similarly, sites repeatedly urinated or defecated upon by cows
often enough to be noticed have been considered as new temple sites. In some cases, digging that
yielded a pindi (image) or mohara (mental mask) have also been deified as sacred sites. Cows are
also believed to allow their milk to be drunk by snakes at several sacred sites.

3.2. Indigenous systems in herb extraction

Local people have been collecting herbs in this
region for several generations. Though primarily
used in traditional medicinal systems in the past,
in the last decade a larger commercial market for
these herbs has steadily developed.
Methods of recognition of these herbs as well as
knowledge about collection procedures have been
passed on from generation to generation among
the local people. In our study, we discovered
several local management practices that appear to
have been designed to ensure sustainability of herb
collection. Some of these are discussed below.
There are two classes of herb collectors. One is
the group that collects the herbs available only in
alpine meadows above the tree line, while a second High-atitude meadows Photo: Ashish Kothari
group collects herbs that are found at lower altitudes. Herbs in the alpine meadows are difficult to
reach, and often involve strenuous climbs; only men (generally between the ages of 15 and 45)
form part of this group. At lower altitudes, entire families are involved in collection. Herbs collected
in these two distinct zones are listed separately (see Case Studies).
Among the high-altitude collectors are two groups. One, the Fuwals, are seasonal graziers. Their
primary aim in reaching the alpine pastures is to graze livestock during the summer months.
Fuwals generally stay in the alpine pastures for up to three months (June to August) and collect
herbs during their stay. The presence of Fuwals is important, as they are usually the first to travel
to the meadows, marking access pathways as they travel. A second group comprises local people
who visit the high-altitude pastures specifically to collect medicinal herbs. This second group is
state chapter - himachal pradesh

more significant to herb extraction in the region: their number has increased in recent years with
increasing demand while the number of Fuwals has decreased.
Local herb collectors show a keen awareness of the regeneration capacity of various herbs. They
follow a system of rotational closure. Herb collectors are aware that if the same area is exploited
every year, there is insufficient regeneration and collection efforts prove to be drastically inefficient
as the returns for time invested are very low. Fallow periods between collection used to stretch for
between three to four years in the past, but areas are now accessed in alternate years.
First-time herb collectors are taught how to identify and collect herbs by more experienced
collectors, since the collectors generally travel in groups. For most medicinal herbs, the root is the
valuable part. Aware of the fact that root removal affects regeneration, collectors make sure that
a small bit of the root is left behind. Collectors are able to tell root depths of the various herbs.
None of the herb collectors interviewed recollects the quantity of herbs having decreased over
time due to extraction efforts. The number of collectors has however increased. No quarrels were
reported between any of the collectors, and they feel that there are enough herbs for all collectors:
resource scarcity has not yet become an issue.
240 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The increase in market rates of these herbs has prompted some collectors to contract outsiders
as wage labour for collection. Local collectors are of the opinion that outsiders are either unaware
of, or simply not bothered about, sustainable collection techniques and tend to plough up the
whole area instead of patiently collecting single plants. Local people resent their entry and have
stopped them from entering the area, as they are not perceived to be right-holders.

3.3. Indigenous systems in grazing management

3.3.1. Rotation of grazing
Graziers in Himachal report a system of rotation between pastures every alternate year. Herds
from Pashi village, for instance, graze for about 15–20 days in four different pastures, which are
used in rotation from among a total of six pastures (Khanersu, Shilliluagadi, Rathithati, Bhkhalkada,
Vaich and Kasal in Jiwa valley). Similarly, one herd from Shainsher (village Tung, Bajahara, Talahra,
Jangla) cyclically uses the pastures available between Khandhar and Paniharn in the Khandadhar
sub-valley of the Jiwa valley. Herds from Plaich and Pekhari, interviewed in Dhela, take different
routes on their return journey every year.
The graziers invariably described grazing of livestock in the upper Sainj and Jiwa valleys as a
right, with some mentioning that it was Kagjati (legal) and recorded with the patwari (land records
official). Opinion was divided as to whether this right was vested with the family or the village.
However, access regimes seem to be worked out neatly and there is little confusion over who
should graze in which location. Livestock are taken to pastures locally referred to as thatch. Each
panchayat has the rights of grazing cattle on a particular thatch. Since pastures are grazed by
rotation, there is good regeneration of nutritious grasses every year.

3.3.2. Grazing and wildlife interactions

In responding to suggestions that livestock herds might be disturbing wildlife habitat in forests
during spring migrations,9 most graziers replied in the negative. Herders claim that there is
relatively little grazing in forests, as the graziers are in a hurry to reach their respective pastures
in the alpine meadows. A few graziers acknowledged that some nests might get destroyed but all
pointed out that their spring migrations take place after the second half of May, by which time the
young of pheasants and other animals are big enough to get out of the way. Some mentioned that
there are nests of some small birds in the alpine pastures as well, but they are invariably out of
reach of the sheeps and goats.
In the Jiwa valley, graziers reported the presence of a tall shrub, maasnu,10 as the reason for
very little grazing on the upward spring migration. This shrub, present throughout the valley in
the forest, especially between Kundar and Apgain (Himalayan monal country par excellence), is
injurious to livestock in its earlier vegetative phase, and graziers have to take extra precautions
to prevent sheep and goats from browsing on its young shoots. However, once fully grown, this
species is highly nutritious and is therefore grazed heavily on the return journey. This information
was collected on the second trek undertaken by us in the area and therefore could not be validated
with graziers in the Sainj and Tirthan valleys. However, if incidence of maasnu influences grazing in
the forested zones, the high concentration of pheasants, especially himalayan monal and western
tragopan in the Jiwa valley could be an indicator that the sparse monal population in the other
valleys may be due to the overlap of grazing and the breeding season of monal.
Most graziers admitted that the possibility of transmission of diseases from domestic livestock to
wildlife exists, but most pointed out that possibilities were remote, as wildlife rarely grazes on the
same pastures as domestic livestock. Interestingly, the Rakti herds were inoculated at the graziers’
own initiative, by government vets in Khanag village, Ani.
Hunting of wildlife by the graziers was a sensitive issue during
discussions. All those interviewed maintained that they never
hunted wild animals for food, as there was enough meat available
from injured goats and sheep. Hunting was resorted to only in case
of predators poaching on domestic stock.11 Graziers lamented the
arduous and lengthy procedure for filing of claims for compensation from
the Forest Department, which they claimed was Rs 150 per animal killed,
against the market price of Rs 900–1500 per animal.
 Himachal Pradesh 241

3.3.3. Grazing and biodiversity conservation: Shall the twain

meet?
Research on the impact of grazing by domestic livestock on the
natural ecosystem has attracted a lot of attention in the last two
decades. There is a growing body of knowledge on the ecological
impact of grazing. More specifically, in the context of conservation,
issues of grazing have been hotly debated between scientists, social
scientists and policy-makers. Total closure of core conservation
area from biotic interference is held as an article of faith by many
conservationists, making grazing one of the more contentious and
tricky issues in the implementation of conservation strategies.
On the basis of data and information detailed in the case studies
(see Case Studies), a few arguments are put forward here with
respect to traditional grazing management systems in Himachal.
Impacts of grazing have so far been discussed only in ambiguous Wolves often attack livestock herds
terms, with few specific instances being mentioned in the literature. Photo: Yash Veer Bhatnagar &
Amongst other ‘problem areas’ with grazing, the transmission of Charu Mishra
diseases, weed infestations, regeneration suppression, possibilities
of graziers carrying guns, disturbance during the breeding season of select wildlife species and
destruction of the preferred habitat of musk deer have been identified. None of these, however,
have been followed up with concrete evidence. This is not to say that these phenomena are absent,
but evidence needs to be presented of their impacts at the landscape level. There has been no
study encompassing the entire spectrum of biodiversity with respect to grazing. Evidence from
the Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve suggests that the populations and species diversity of certain
smaller organisms like mosses, lichens and liverworts have gone down alarmingly in the decade
after grazing was stopped. Sabharwal (1999),12 quoting from data collected in the neighbouring
Bara Bhangal area with similar ecological characteristics but higher grazing incidence, argues
that grazing does not seem to have adverse impact on species diversity at the level of the overall
landscape. And if the conservation value of the musk deer and Western tragopan is the same as
that of a soil-loving liverwort, then regulated grazing might have to be considered seriously.
The IIPA (1990)13 report makes the point that since grazing has been going on in the area for at
least a century, the ecosystem has ‘arguably become adapted to it’. The report further goes on to
state: ‘… therefore, there seems to be no urgency to stop all grazing.’ The stoppage of all grazing
activities would be detrimental to the very objectives of biodiversity conservation.
With the incidence of grazing more than a century old, the ecological composition of the forest
and alpine zones has a definite anthropogenic character. Abrupt changes in grazing intensity might
lead to a loss of biodiversity, and without conclusive evidence to the contrary, no such change
should be recommended. Moreover, as local knowledge suggests, species composition of grazed
areas shifts in favour of shrubs when grazing is stopped; therefore, a matrix of grazed and non-
grazed areas could actually enhance biodiversity.14

3.4. Forest co-operative societies: The Kangra village forest scheme

The conditions of forests of the outer Himalayas was discussed in a forest conference in 1935
where it was realized that indiscriminate felling, lopping, grazing and browsing had taken a heavy
state chapter - himachal pradesh

toll of forest and soil cover and had resulted in accelerated erosion in the foothills. A resolution,
proposed by H.M. Grover and seconded by A.P.F. Hamilton and unanimously passed, stated: ‘… the
conference is firmly of opinion that the state of the undemarcated forests is so deplorable that the
recent policy for their management must be changed. The practicability of forming village forests
should be examined, and government may kindly be asked to appoint a committee to decide what
particular steps should be taken in each district of the outer Himalayas.’
In pursuance of this resolution, the Punjab Government appointed a commission of inquiry,
referred to as the Garbett Commission, on 28 September 1937. The terms of reference of this
commission were to identify:
• Difficulties are experienced by those who live in and near forests as a result of the existing
system of forest administration;
• The means of eliciting their interest in the conservation of the forests; and
• The means of encouraging and securing their cooperation in activities of the forest department
242 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The Commission observed that 79.6 per cent of forests in Kangra District were not only burdened
with heavy rights of the users, but were also fast deteriorating. The Commission recommended ‘…
that effort(s) be made to teach the villagers that whatever profit may accrue from the management of
the shamlat and the reserves shall be to their benefit, provided only that they agree to management
according to simple working plans, approved by Government which will involve closures where
closures are demonstrably necessary. In order that the people may have qualified representatives,
Panchayats must be formed to whom the details of the forest management of the area in which the
village is situated will be explained. For this purpose a working scheme of management for each
village must be prepared. The scheme will envisage management of not only the shamlat, but also
of the Protected and Reserved Forests in which the village have rights in such a way as to secure
the maximum crop of forest produce for the benefit of the villagers.’
The Punjab government accepted these recommendations in August 1938 and requested the
forest department to draw up a more detailed scheme. It was in pursuance of this decision that the
idea of managing the waste and forest lands in association with villagers originated. It was decided
that Cooperative Forest Societies be constituted throughout Kangra District and further that all the
Reserved, Demarcated and Undemarcated Protected Forests, Unclassed forests, Ban Mauti and
Shamlats—and for that matter even lands under private ownership, which the owners may wish to
entrust to the society for management—were to form a common economic unit of management.
In an effort to tackle the menace of erosion, an Anti-erosion Forest Circle was created in 1938 and
the work of the Kangra Village Forest Scheme was entrusted to that circle.
With the mauza as the basic economic unit, Cooperative Forest Societies (CFS) were launched by
the then Conservator of Forests, Eastern Circle, on 18 August 1938. On 1 April 1939, a new Forest
Division, called the Kangra Village Forest Division, under the charge of an Imperial Forest Service
Officer, H.S. Deans, was created to implement the scheme.
The scheme was initially sanctioned for five years in 1940 with an annual grant-in-aid of Rs
50,000. The scheme was periodically extended up to 1973. Formation of CFSs continued up to 1953
when 72 CFS covering an area of 59,848 acres were formed. Subsequently the management of
two CFSs was terminated on account of mismanagement and mutual squabbles amongst numbers,
with the number of CFSs reduced to 7015 with an area of 58,236 acres (23,556ha). The grant-in-
aid to the societies was raised to Rs 90,000 in 1955 with the condition that the additional amount
of Rs 40,000 would be spent on extending this scheme to the Hamirpur tehsil. Funds were later
withdrawn and no new CFS was formed in view of observations made by the then chief minister of
Punjab, B.S. Sachar, that CFSs were not broad-based enough and the income of forests were being
diverted to favoured groups of people.
Table 2: Details of different categories of land under CFS

Administrative Extent (acres) %

category
Reserved Forests 1,590 2.7
Demarcated Protected 17,640 30.00
Forests
Undemarcated 27,548 49.30
Protected Forests
Unclassed Forests 9,312 14.10
Ban Maufi Forests 178 0.40
Shamlat 235 1.40
Private Waste Lands 1,070 1.80
TOTAL 58,236 100.00

3.4.1. Weaknesses and strengths of the CFS scheme

Weaknesses
• There has been a lack of political will to continue the scheme.
• Officers of the forest department have little control over the working of CFSs, their roles being
mainly technical and advisory in nature.
• Forest officers, rakhas and other employees of CFSs were poorly paid, leading to several instances
where the rakhas were themselves guilty of offences. The salaries of these employees varied
between Rs 10 to Rs 500 per month.
 Himachal Pradesh 243

• Rakhas were mostly illiterate and without exception untrained in management of forests. They
lacked missionary zeal. There was no trained forest staff in the societies and forest management
suffered at the hands of the untrained and illiterate staff.
• There was lack of coordination between stakeholders — the Forest Department, CFSs, the State
Cooperative Department and the villagers.
• Villagers including CFS members indulged in illicit encroachments and felling. No severe action was
taken against them. The damage reports against them were compounded for petty amounts.
• No action was taken against CFSs that did not carry out prescriptions according to Working Plans.
The recommendations of Forest Officers were rarely given any weightage.
• There was often conflict between the members of Panchayats and CFSs.
• Infighting among the members of CFSs was a problem.
• The bye-laws, which were framed to suit the then social and economic conditions, became dated
and were never amended.
• Village communities had access to a one-fourth share of the gross income from sale of trees
(called zamindari share) that was to be divided among the community in the following ratio:
landowners 8 annas, lambardar 3 annas; patwari 2 annas, and rakha 3 annas. The share of the
patwari was stopped in 1946 and that of the lambardar was also stopped in 1976, creating much
discontent.
• With the introduction of the Himachal Pradesh Village Land Vesting and Utilization Act, 1974,
ownership of shamlat lands was transferred to the State. Communities gradually lost interest in
CFSs.
Strengths
• The CFS scheme has been instrumental in winning the interest of local people where benefits
have flowed to the community.
• CFSs are quite sound legally and have definite/notified area for management.
• CFSs can raise funds from other sources like contributions, acceptance of deposits, etc. It is on
this account that some societies have done very well in achieving the objectives of the formation
of CFSs.
3.4.2. Revival of cooperative forest societies: Some recommendations
Given the unsatisfactory performance of most CFSs established in the past and the inherent
shortcomings of the scheme, general opinion favours closure of the scheme. However, keeping in
view the National Forest Policy and a State Government Order dated 12 May 1993 on Participatory
JFM for planning, protection, afforestation and judicious use for the ecodevelopment of barren,
degraded state land and protected forests, CFS schemes could be continued in an amended form,
more comparable to the Village Development Committee formed under the above order.

4. Conclusions
The future of community conservation in Himachal is dependent on the following integrated
approaches.
state chapter - himachal pradesh

4.1. Inter-sectoral coordination

The dichotomy of conservation and development policies needs to be addressed through more
holistic approaches. This would require considerable change, as the present institutional mechanisms
are oriented towards sectoral working at the policy and the field level. A variety of approaches and
strategies have to be worked out for this purpose, which could include incentives and disincentives
to agencies/organisations directly or indirectly affecting the conservation of natural resources.

4.2. Participatory monitoring protocols

Simple and participatory monitoring methods are required to be developed for field testing. Our
perception of the full dimension of biodiversity remains very vague, but with time we may expect
species estimates to be made with increasing confidence and precision. There is a need to develop
sampling methods and protocols that allow reliable comparisons between sites without a complete
inventory being taken.16 The use of both formal documentation and non-formal indigenous knowledge
bases can provide vital information on the sustainable conservation management systems.
244 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

4.3. Outstanding individuals/communities

The process of change always creates a set of outstanding individuals/communities (in terms of
local innovation) who are able set the trend among people to deal with changed circumstances. Much
benefit could be derived from giving recognition to innovative farmers, indigenous communities
and institutions that have a stake in conservation.

4.4. Benefit-sharing mechanisms

An effective conservation policy based on better understandings of biological resources and
their uses would require new mechanisms of cooperation among local communities, government
agencies and non-governmental organizations. Economic benefits have to be assigned to natural
resources. New benefit-sharing mechanisms have to be evolved so that unsustainable resource
use is minimized.

4.5. Greater public awareness

An informed public is biodiversity’s most effective custodian. Publications in the form of field
guides and educational material, and their dissemination through modern and traditional methods
would help.

Virinder Sharma is with the State Council for Science, Technology and Environment, Himachal
Pradesh, currently working at the UK Department of International Development. Much of the
introductory text of this chapter has largely been adapted from a paper by Chetan Singh,
prepared for the State Council for Science, Technology and Environment, in 2000.

Endnotes
1
R. Gurung, Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Biodiversity Management. Proceedings of ICIMOD Seminar held in
Nepal, April 1994.
2
Barnes, ‘Final Report on settlement of Kangra District’, (Lahore, Govt. Press, 1862).
3
Barnes, ‘Final Report’ (As above)
4
R.D. Whyte, ‘The Grasslands and Fodder Resources of India’, Scientific Monograph 22, Indian Council of Agricultural
Research, New Delhi (1957).
5
Barnes, ‘Final Report’. (As above).
6
Barnes, ‘Final Report’. (As above).
7
This legislation also, in fact, legitimised British hunting (ably assisted by the hill state rajas in their respective
regions), as shikar was codified and their version of sport encouraged royal hunting trips.
8
Temple priests. Some are brahmins but most are kanets.
9
These migrations coincide with the breeding season of himalayan monal, koklass pheasant, western tragopan,
goral, mainland serow, and himalayan musk deer.
10
Scientific name not known.
11
Even this was usually not required as the guard dogs accompanying the herd usually raised an alarm, thus foiling
attempts by predators.
12
V.K. Sabharwal, Pastoral politics:Shepherds, Bureaucrats and Conservation in Western Himalayas (Delhi, Oxford
University Press, 1999).
13
S. Shekhar, A. Kothari and P. Pande, Directory of National Parks and Sanctuaries in Himachal Pradesh (Delhi
Environmental Studies Division, IIPA, 1990)
14
Editorial note: In 1999, the Great Himalayan National Park entered into a final notification phase, and all grazing
rights were terminated. However grazing appears to have continued, though in lesser numbers, till as late as 2004
or 2005. The impacts on the Park’s ecosystem, or its wildlife, are not yet known.
15
Twenty are in Dharamshala, 15 in Palampur, 9 in Dehra and the remaining 26 in the Nurpur Forest Division. Of the
70 CFSs, 35 are paying and the remaining 35 are non-paying forest societies.
16
World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth’s Living Resources.
(London, Chapman and Hall, 1992).
 CCA/HP/CS1/Chamba/Kamla/Forest protection

Kamla village, Chamba

Background
Village Kamla is located in the Bhatiyat taluka in Chamba district of Himachal Pradesh.
The village can be approached by bus from Dharamshala (75 km) and Chamba (115 km).
Located in the western Himalayan region, the topography is mountainous and of mixed Shivalik-
Himalayan formation. The area experiences a sub-tropical climate with an annual rainfall of
1500 mm. The forest ecosystem has south-facing slopes of the Dhauladhar range. The forest is
regenerating with a mixed species composition. Major species found here are beul, khirik or toon,
mulberry or shahtoot, aam, amrud, aadu, naakha (a variety of pear), kachnar, sisso and tuni.
Legally, the area under community conservation is a Demarcated Protected Forest.
The main communities residing in the village are Rajputs, Brahmins, Mehras, Julahas, Gaddis
(migratory pastoralists) and Tarkhans. Chamars, Doomnas, Kumhars, Jogis, Charajs and Mashkus
are the main scheduled caste communities. The total human population is 900 living in 109
households. Agriculture and service are the main occupations. The livestock population is 450. The
villagers depend on the forest for fodder, fuelwood and other biomass needs.

Towards community conservation

The conservation initiative began in 1983 when the forest department decided to grow pine
on the degraded south-facing slopes in the region. The people opposed the move and wanted to
demonstrate to the FD that a broad-leaved forest can be raised on these slopes. Inputs were taken
from a local NGO, Himalaya Bachao Samiti, for this purpose. All the villagers, men and women
of all castes, under the management of Gram Utthan Sabha of Kamla village took charge of 5 ha
patch of forest and defined rules and regulations for its protection:
1. No grazing allowed in the forest.
2. Grass collection permitted only after a date decided by the committee (in October
November).
3. Fuelwood collection allowed only for household consumption and not for sale.
4. Land has been divided temporarily among the households for grass collection.
Earlier, there was a full-time guard to look after the forest, paid for by voluntary contributions
by the villagers in cash and kind. This practice was subsequently discontinued as it was no longer
required.
Most decisions in the village are taken in the general body meeting (consisting of both men
and women), which takes place roughly four times a year. The executive committee consists
of 9 people, elected in an open process. Women as well as lower castes can be a part of the
case studies - himachal pradesh

executive committee. Conflicts are resolved within the village itself in the traditional system of
conflict resolution. Some more active individuals in the village have subsequently registered an
NGO for working on the issues of village development and forest management.

Impacts of community effort

There has been remarkable regeneration and growth of planted species—all broad-leaved—
without added pressure on the other adjacent forests. The protected forest is now dense and
close-canopied. Besides increase in vegetation cover, an increase in tree and shrub diversity and
consequent increase in bird diversity has been noticed. Local species of grasses have regenerated
and some which had disappeared have resurfaced.
The community has benefited by the increase in fodder production, prevention of soil erosion
and now enjoys moral authority over forest department. According to the forest department the
initiative has decreased the conflict between the farmers and rhesus macaque monkeys over crop
damage caused by these primates. Now there appears to be a much higher availability of food and
245
fruits in the forest.
246 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Opportunities and constraints

In 1999, the villagers opted for inclusion in the sanjha van yojana (joint forest management)
scheme introduced by the Himachal Pradesh Forest Department with the objective of getting
access to government funds for forest conservation. However, the villagers opposed the scheme
when they realized that the micro-plan under the project was drafted by the forest department
without any involvement of the local people. Thus the micro-plan included activities contradictory
to the needs of the local people. No activities have been taken up by the forest department under
JFM due to the opposition of villagers and paucity of funds. The villagers are now demanding that
their conserved forest be recognized as a village forest under section 8 of the Indian Forest Act
1927.

This case study was compiled based on the CCA Directory questionnaire answered by Akshay,
Himalaya Bachao Samiti, Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, in April 2000.

For more information contact:

Adhyaksha
Gram Utthan Sabha Kamla
Village Kamla, PO Garnota
Sub-tehsil Sihunta
Chamba 175207, HP

Himalaya Bachao Samiti

Village Kamla, PO Garnota
Sub-tehsil Sihunta
Chamba 175207, HP
 CCA/HP/CS2/Chamba/Rajain/Forest protection

Rajain village, Chamba

Background
This community-conserved area is located in the Bhatiyat taluka of Chamba district in Himachal
Pradesh, about 75 km from Dharamsala and 115 km from Chamba town. The nearest bus stop is
at a distance of 4 km and the closest railway station is in Pathankot, which is 75 km away from
the village.
The landscape is mountainous, of mixed Shivalik-Himalayan formation with sub-tropical forests.
This region has south-facing slopes of the Dhauladhar range. The forest is regenerating with
mixed species like ban, pine, champa, kachnar, sisso and tuni. Rhesus macaques are found here in
plenty. The legal status of the community-conserved area is Demarcated Protected Forest.
The main communities here are rajputs, brahmins and sippys (scheduled caste), making for
a total population of 155. Agriculture and service are the main sources of income. The villagers
also own livestock. The livestock population is 300. Forest dependence is mainly for fuelwood.
The villagers have legal rights to grazing and fodder, fuelwood and biomass collection from the
forest.

Towards community conservation

Conservation efforts here began in 1991, when the villagers experienced extreme scarcity of
fodder for their livestock. With inputs from a local NGO, Himalaya Bachao Samiti (HBS), the entire
community, inclusive of all castes, both men and women, decided that grazing would be stopped
in the selected 10 ha of forest. Initially, there was interference from neighbouring village, but the
conflict was resolved with the help of HBS.
A van sudhar sabha was formed with the following rules and regulations:
1. No free grazing
2. No fuelwood collection
3. Collective grass collection at a specified time, usually October-November
Land was temporarily divided between households for grass collection. A full-time guard was paid
for by voluntary contributions in both cash and kind by the villagers.
The van sudhar sabha has an executive committee of 13 people, elected in an open process.
Most decisions are however taken in the general body meeting (men and women), which takes
place roughly twice a year. Women are not allowed to become members of the executive. Any
conflicts are dealt with as per the traditional system of management. All expenses are met through
voluntary contributions.

Impacts of community effort

case studies - himachal pradesh

Since the protection started, there has been an increase in fodder production. Soil erosion, which
was a serious problem before the protection, has also stopped. An increase in vegetation cover has
been observed with increase in tree and shrub diversity. Bird diversity has also increased; local
species of grasses have regenerated and some have even resurfaced.

Opportunities and constraints

The relationship between the community and the forest department is hostile due to lack of legal
support for the initiative under the forest laws. The community demands recognition as a Village
Forest under the Indian Forest Act, 1927.

247
248 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

This case study has been compiled based on a questionnaire answered by Vishal Sharma, Himalaya
Bachao Samiti, Chamba, on 5 April 2000. We are extremely grateful for useful comments and
contributions from Satya Prasanna Bambam on the first draft.

For more information contact:

Prem Singh
Village Rajain, PO Garnota
Sub-tehsil Sihunta
Chamba 175207, HP

Himalaya Bachao Samiti

Village Kamla, PO Garnota
Sub-tehsil Sihunta
Chamba 175207, HP
 CCA/HP/CS3/Dharamsala/Mcleodganj/Forest protection

Mcleodganj and nearby villages, Dharamsala

Background
Dharamsala district in Himachal Pradesh has been a bird-watchers’ delight since a long time now.
Getting off at the Mcleodganj bus stand, the bird enthusiasts travel to nearby villages like Haripur,
Dehra Gopipur and Nagarota Surivan near Pathankot. The Pong dam,1 one of the biggest wetlands
of Asia, attracts avian visitors by the thousands every year from as far as Russia, Siberia, Central
Asia, Tibet and Ladakh.
Rare terns like the gull-bellied tern and little tern breed here. The Pong also attracts waders like
lapwings and plovers. Twenty per cent of the bar-headed geese that breed on the Tibetan plateau
winter at Pong. The Pong is also a refuge for threatened species like the sarus crane, woolly-necked
stork, painted stork, red-necked falcon, black-bellied tern, white-tailed eagle, red-headed vulture
and white-rumped vulture. Kangra Bird Club, formed by a few bird enthusiasts, has recorded about
480 species of birds in Kangra District and 370 species at Pong wetland itself.
According to one of the members of Kangra Bird Club, these birds have been a way of life in
Kangra. The villagers of the Kangra valley live in perfect amity with the birds and normally do not
disturb the birds whilst going along with their daily work. The villagers do not mind even if the birds
feed on their maize fields. According to Lajja Devi of Haripur village, even when sometimes flocks
of 100 bar-headed geese raid their fields, villagers refrain from harming or killing them; instead
they accept the losses considering that the birds have come to their village after travelling long
distances. Besides plentiful food and shelter on little islands on the lake, the winged visitors also
get ample peace and quiet.

Opportunities and constraints

But all this may not last long according to Dr. H.S. Mehta, Joint Director of the Zoological
Survey of India at Solan. Pressures of livelihood have increased, which has been causing a conflict
between the fishermen and the birds. Birds feed on prawns, mahseer and shrimps, all of which are
also commercially very important for the local fishermen.

This information has been put together from a newspaper clipping ‘What’s good for the Geese’
by Manraj Grewal, Dharamsala, in the Sunday Express, 20 Ocober 2002.

Endnotes
1
The Pong reservoir came up in 1974. It has a length of 46 kms and a width of 15 kms.
case studies - himachal pradesh

249
 CCA/HP/CS4/Kinnaur/Chhitkul/Forest protection

Chhitkul village, Kinnaur

Background
In the western Himalayas, 10 hectares of forest and 30 hectares of alpine pastures have been
under the protection of the Chhitkul village community for over five decades. This village is situated
in the Sangla taluka of Kinnaur district in Himachal Pradesh. The nearest town from Chhitkul is
Shimla, and state transport buses ply to the village.
Lying in the western Himalayan region, the landscape is typically mountainous with temperate
forests and alpine meadows. The very diverse plant community here includes species like bhojpatra
or birch and kail. Some of the significant fauna of the region includes brown bear, musk deer,
Himalayan yellow-throated marten, Western tragopan and Himalayan monal.
Legally, this community-protected area is also a part of Rakchham Chhitkul Wildlife Sanctuary.
This sanctuary along with Govind Pashu Vihar Sanctuary in the neighbouring hill state of Uttaranchal
and forms a viable habitat for the snow leopard.
Rajputs and lohars (the latter are scheduled castes) are the main communities residing in the
village. The total human population is about 600. Their main occupation is agriculture and service.
The cattle population is 300 and sheep/goats are 1500 in number. The villagers depend on the
forest for fuelwood and biomass extraction (60 per cent of the requirement of the 90 households is
met from the forest. Medicinal plants that are extracted from the forest form an additional source
of income for the villagers. 90 cattle and 500 sheep graze in the forest for six months a year and
in the alpine pastures for a few weeks.

Towards community conservation

The beginnings of the initiative can be traced back to 1960 when the village community started
facing severe shortages of fuelwood. The reason was illegal felling carried out by the neighbouring
village, Rakchham. The entire village of Chhitkul decided to protect the forest and the surrounding
alpine pastures. Initially they faced conflict with Rakchham village. The traditional village
council (called maith committee) took the responsibility of managing the designated area under
protection.
Some of rules followed by the maith include:
1. Quantitative restrictions were laid on fuelwood collected from the forest for personal consumption.
Only one headload per household per day was allowed.
2. Fuelwood collection for sale was not allowed.
3. The right to collect medicinal plants from the alpine pastures is auctioned by the community
every 4–5 years to local contractors. (In 1998, it was auctioned for Rs 4 lakh.) Seasonality of
extraction was to be prescribed by the maith committee.
4. No extraction of any kind was allowed in the intervening years.
case studies - himachal pradesh

For regulating the extraction of medicinal plants, a committee is appointed by the villagers before
the extraction of medicinal plants, to ascertain the regeneration since the last auction, the amount
available for extraction and the minimum bidding amount. The same committee is also made
responsible to monitor the extraction process. The money from the auction of medicinal plants is
then used for village development works. The status after the declaration of the sanctuary in 1999
is not known.
The village council includes everybody in the village—all men, women and children. The council
meets every month to discuss relevant issues. Attendance is compulsory. The village leader is
elected every two years. The post is rotated between different families. Re-election is not possible
for several terms. Lower castes participate fully and also assume leadership positions. Conflicts are
dealt within the community itself in the traditional system of resolving conflicts.

250
 Himachal Pradesh 251

Impacts of community effort

The community has successfully managed to regulate its consumption within the framework
of rules laid down by the maith. The success of this protection is largely due to the careful and
flexible management strategies following customary rules and regulations. Some of the benefits
of protection are availability of fuelwood, local empowerment, a greater equity among the village
members and equal opportunity to all castes. In addition, the village generates revenue from the
sale of the forest produce, which has been used for village development.

Opportunities and constraints

In 1999, the area was declared as a wildlife sanctuary. Although the Wildlife Act does not permit
most of the activities carried out by the villagers, all rights of the 90 households to fuelwood,
fodder, grazing, timber, medicinal plants and biomass have been allowed. However, subsequent to
declaration of the sanctuary, timber allotment for house construction has been stopped. This has
led to a hostile relationship of the local community with the wildlife authorities.

This case study has been compiled based on the CCA directory questionnaire answered by Satya
Prakash Bambam, who was at the time of writing this case study working with Navrachna based
in Palampur. The questionnaire was filled on 13 November 2000.

For more information contact:

Rajkumari
Panchayat Pradhan
Vill. Chhitkul, PO Sangla
176001 Dist Kinnaur, HP

Satya Prakash Bambam

Post Box 22, Palampur 176061, HP
E-mail: spbambam@rediffmail.com

case studies - himachal pradesh

 CCA/HP/CS5/Kullu/Padhar/Forest protection

Padhar Village, Kullu

Background
Padhar village is located about 3 km away from Manali town in Manali taluka of Kullu district,
Himachal Pradesh. This Middle Himalayan region is at an altitude of 1850 m and experiences heavy
snowfall with sub-zero temperature in the winter months.
A steeply sloping conifer forest surrounds the village with tree species like deodar, khanor,
akhrot, bhojpatra or birch, rakhal, rai or spruce, tosh and chir. The legal status of the forest is
Demarcated Protected Forest. The Manali Sanctuary falls within 10 km of the conserved area.
The main communities residing in Padhar are the rajputs (higher caste) and the lohars (scheduled
castes). The total population of the village is 250, living in 40 households. Horticulture, tourism
and service are the main areas of income generation. The total livestock population numbers 52.
All the requirements of biomass and about 30 per cent requirement of leaf fodder is met from the
forest. The forest has been divided among adjoining villages during the forest settlement done by
the government. The rights of all 40 households have been legally codified, thus eliminating any
possibilities of conflict amongst neighbours.

Towards community conservation

In the early 1980s large-scale logging operations were carried out by the forest department
in these forests. This was followed by felling of trees for making boxes for transporting apple in
the late 80s and later by illegal felling by the timber mafia. In 1995, the region experienced a
massive flood that wreaked havoc in the village and destroyed much of the villagers’ property.
This was the starting point of the community conservation initiative. The villagers realized that
the impact of floods was high because of the degrading forests and decided to protect the forest
in order to prevent floods. Women of the mahila mandal (women’s organization) took the lead
and together with the yuvak mandal (youth club) started forest protection. Slowly, these two
institutions evolved into the gaon (village) committee. The village committee meets quarterly with
the active participation of all castes.
Some of the rules followed by villagers include:
1. Complete ban on grazing in the forest
2. Rotational closure for grass
3. Ban on extraction of fuel wood and timber
In order to enforce the rules, the villagers voluntarily patrol the forests. All conflicts are handled
according to the traditional system and offenders are fined. Plantations have also been undertaken
in some parts with monetary contributions from within the village.
case studies - himachal pradesh

Impacts of community effort

The 10 ha of forest taken under protection has successfully regenerated and there has been
no soil erosion or flash floods in the region. The villagers themselves have benefited from the
initiative. They now feel more empowered to solve their own problems. They also have a much
better availability of natural resources.

Opportunities and constraints

Some of the constraints faced by the community because of the conservation initiative are:
1. Women have to move longer distances for collection of fuelwood..
2. Although there is a restriction on grazing, the number of livestock has not reduced, leading to
some conflicts.

252
 Himachal Pradesh 253

This case study has been compiled based on the CCA directory questionnaire answered by Satya
Prakash Bambam, who was at the time of writing this case study working with Navrachna based
in Palampur. The questionnaire was filled on 13 November 2000.

For more information contact:

Mathura Devi
Village Padhar, PO Bahung
Manali, Kullu 175 131, HP

Satya Prakash Bambam

Post Box 22, Palampur 176061, HP
E-mail: spbambam@rediffmail.com

case studies - himachal pradesh

 CCA/HP/CS6/Kullu/Shanag/Forest protection

Shanag village, Kullu

Background
Shanag village is located 3 km from Manali town in Manali taluka of Kullu district in Himachal
Pradesh. Buses are available from Manali to reach the village.
The landscape, with an altitude of 2000 m, is typical of the Middle Himalayas. Temperatures drop
to sub-zero levels during winter, accompanied by heavy snowfall. The ecosystem can be described
as a steeply sloping conifer forest with species like deodar, khanor, akhrot, bhojpatra or birch,
rakhal, rai or spruce and tosh. The region is rich in fauna like the brown bear, Himalayan black
bear, leopard, barking deer, musk deer, Himalayan monal, Koklass pheasant, kalij pheasant and
the Western tragopan. The Manali Sanctuary lies within 10 km of the community-conserved area.
The legal status of the land is demarcated protected forest.
The total population of the village is 600, with two main communities; rajputs and dagis (scheduled
caste). The primary occupations are horticulture and tourism-related. Some villagers also derive
income from jobs. The total livestock population is 680. The forest is mainly used for grazing by
200 cattle (for 6 months), 400 sheep/goats (for 6 months) and 150 migratory buffaloes (for 4
months). All the requirements of fuelwood, timber, biomass and 30 per cent of the requirement
of leaf fodder for the 121 households is also met from the forest. The villagers have legal rights
(codified during forest settlement) to biomass, fodder, fuelwood and timber in the forest.

Towards community conservation

In the early 80s, large-scale logging operations were carried out in the forest by the Forest
Department. This was followed by tree felling for making boxes for transporting apples in the late
80s, and later by illegal felling by the timber mafia. In 1995, there was a considerable reduction in
snowfall in the region. Snowfall is considered to be good for the apple crop. This coincided with the
environmental propaganda of the state linking snowfall to better forest cover and the realisation
by the villagers that forest cover is good for the tourist trade. These factors persuaded the local
community to protect its forest. Yet another reason was to stop the illegal felling of trees that was
the major cause of destruction of the forest.
The gaon (village) committee took charge of 200 ha of forest for protection and formulated the
following rules and regulations:
1. Closure for rotational grazing.
2. Quantitative restrictions on grass-fodder extraction which was now restricted to one bundle per
household per day after the designated opening of the forest.
3. No hunting permitted in the forest.
4. No sale of fuelwood and fodder allowed.
5. Voluntary monitoring and enforcement responsibilities taken up by the villagers.
case studies - himachal pradesh

6. Taxes are imposed on migratory graziers.

The rule-breakers are fined. Initially, the scheduled castes were not allowed to participate in
decision making. However, access was equalized later for the scheduled castes after negotiations
within the village. This happened due to mediation by the woman pradhan of the panchayat, Vidya
Devi. The gaon committee has a seven-member executive committee, which meets quarterly.
Disputes and conflicts are resolved in the traditional manner within the community itself. Panchayat
support has been critical in resolving internal conflict and increasing inter-caste equity. The
government is indifferent to the conservation efforts of the people. All finances required for the
effort are met through voluntary contributions.

Impacts of community effort

The villagers have benefited from the conservation because of the increased access to resources

254
 Himachal Pradesh 255

and the sense of empowerment that they feel from successfully managing the forest. Since the
protection started, there has also been a marked increase in wildlife populations in the forest. The
villagers feel that the forest department should support the initiative by recognizing its decisions.

This case study has been compiled based on the CCA directory questionnaire answered by Satya
Prakash Bambam, who was at the time of writing this case study working with Navrachna based
in Palampur. The questionnaire was filled on 13 November 2000.

For more information contact:

Vidya Devi
Village Shanag, PO Bahung
Manali, Kullu 175 131, HP

Satya Prakash Bambam

Post Box 22, Palampur 176061, HP
E-mail: spbambam@rediffmail.com

case studies - himachal pradesh

 CCA/HP/CS7/Mandi/Nanj/Forest protection

Nanj village, Mandi

Background
Nanj village is situated 100 km from Shimla, in the Karsog taluka of Mandi district, Himachal
Pradesh. Since 1992, the villagers of Nanj have succeeded in protecting about 70 ha of adjoining
forest. This village lies in the Middle Himalayan region where the forest includes species like daru
haridra, deodar, khirik or toon, pine, simbal, amla, kambal and sisoo. The fauna includes leopard,
barking deer, jungle fowl and Rhesus macaque. The legal status of the land is Demarcated Protected
Forest. The main communities residing in Nanj are rajputs, brahmins and gujjars (Muslim). The
scheduled caste comprise kolis and chamars. The total population of the village is 700. Agriculture
and service are the primary occupations. The villagers depend on the forest to fulfil their fodder
and biomass needs. Although the village owns significant livestock with 500 cattle, 60 buffaloes,
50 sheep and 40 goats, grazing is restricted in the forest.

Towards community conservation

The mahila mandal of the village took the initiative for conservation in this village in 1992. One of
the reasons was that the women had to walk about 15 km for fodder and in those areas they were
harassed by local villagers because of competition for fodder. Nanj has traditionally been known
for a fertile and irrigated plateau of land. However forest degradation, resulting in excessive soil
loss, has rendered this land infertile over a period of time. The women decided to take steps to
alleviate the fodder scarcity and closed the forest for free grazing. Some of the rules laid down
by them were:
1. Complete ban on free grazing in the protected forest.
2. Fodder collection to be done on days decided in the village general meeting. Collection to be
done by all families together.
3. No individual collection of fodder.
4. Only one bundle of grass allowed per family per day.
All castes participate in the protection under the management of the mahila mandal. The mahila
mandal has an 11-member elected committee which meets once a month.

Impacts of community effort

Very successful regeneration has taken place with many of the native species returning. The
community has benefited by overcoming fodder scarcity in the village.

Opportunities and constraints

Although there is information that due to protection given to one area resource pressures were
diverted to the adjacent forest area, there are no further details available on this.

This case study was compiled based on the CCA Directory questionnaire answered by Akshay
case studies - himachal pradesh

Jasrotia, Himalaya Bachao Samiti, Chamba, in April, 2001.

For more information contact:

Nekram Sharma
Vill and PO Nanj,
Tehsil Karsog, Dist Mandi
171304 HP

Himalaya Bachao Samiti

Vill Kamla, PO Garnota
Sub-tehsil Sihunta
Chamba 175207 HP
256
 CCA/HP/CS8/Mandi/Thalli village/Forest protection

Thalli Village, Mandi

Background
Thalli village is located at a distance of 45 km from Shimla town in the Karsog Taluka of Mandi
district, Himachal Pradesh.
The landscape can be described as a typically Middle Himalayan mountainous region with forests
having species like khair, Poplar or safeda, deodar, daru haridra, kakkad, khirik or toon, simbal,
amla and sissoo. Amongst the fauna, jungle fowl and the Rhesus macaque are found here. The
legal status of these forests is demarcated protected forest.
The dominant communities of the village are the rajputs, brahmins and banias. Besides these
communities, the scheduled castes like kolis and chamars also live here. The total human population
is 450. The main sources of income are agriculture, service and wage labor. The community
depends on the forest for grass fodder, fuelwood, biomass and for material required for fencing.
The total livestock population is 240 cows, 40 buffaloes, 30 sheep, 100 goats and 25 mules and
horses. The villagers have legal rights for all households to fodder, grazing, fuelwood, timber,
biomass and medicinal plants in the forest.

Towards community conservation

The conservation initiative began in 1993 after a violent conflict between the women of Thalli and
the neighbouring village of Shakra over fodder. This incident and the fact that the women had to
walk several kilometres for fodder, where they were also harassed by local villagers, motivated the
mahila mandal (women’s organization) to work towards overcoming fodder scarcity. They began
by closing the forest for grazing. Women took up protection of about 35 ha of forest.
For the protection of forests, some rules were established, which include:
1. Complete closure for grazing in the designated area.
2. Fodder to be collected only on specified days decided in a village general meeting.
3. Fodder to be collected in groups only and only one bundle of grass to be taken per family per
day.
All disputes are dealt with within the community as per the traditional system of conflict resolution.
There exists a general representative body for forest management, which meets irregularly, mostly
when decisions about distribution and allocation of fodder have to be taken. The women are still
very active in the protection and management of the forest

Impacts of community effort

The protection of the forest has ensured that fodder scarcity does not exist in the village any
case studies - himachal pradesh

longer. Closure to grazing for almost ten years has resulted in spectacular regeneration with many
species returning to the area.

Opportunities and constraints

Due to the protection offered to the forest, the villagers have shifted the resource pressure to
adjacent forests.
The Government of Himachal Pradesh decided to include Thalli village in the joint forest
management scheme (JFM). As part of the micro-plans, construction of several bawdis (traditional
water-harvesting structures) was proposed. However the villagers and the forest department got
into a dispute over the constitution of the JFM committee. This has led to JFM here being a totally
non-participatory process. This has created hostility between the people and the FD.

257
258 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

This case study was compiled based on a questionnaire answered by Akshay Jasrotia, Himalaya
Bachao Samiti, Chamba, on 20 April 2000. We are extremely grateful to Satya Prasanna Bambam
for his helpful contribution and comments on the first draft.

For more information contact:

Meera Sharma
Village and PO Thalli,
Via Sunni
Tehsil Karsog,
Dist. Mandi 171301, HP

Akshay Kumar
Himalaya Bachao Samiti
Vill Kamla, PO Garnota
Sub-tehsil Sihunta
Chamba 175207, HP
 CCA/HP/CS 9/Una/Panjawar/Forest protection

Panjawar village, Una

Background
Panjawar is situated in the Haroli taluka of Una district in Himachal Pradesh. Una town is about
20 km from Panjawar and buses and trains ply regularly from here to Panjawar.
The landscape can be described as typically Shivalik with a sub-tropical mixed forest. Species like
khair, pansara and sisoo are found here. Amongst the fauna there are leopards, jackals, barking
deer, Indian wild boars, wild fowl and nilgai.
The upper-caste communities in the village are the rajputs, brahmins, batis, jats and Muslims.
The scheduled caste communities are the julahas, chamars, lohars and telis. The total human
population is 5400. Agriculture, services and wage labour are the main occupations. The total
livestock population is 1000 cows, 4000 buffaloes and 100 goats.
The forests are privately owned by some of the upper-caste people in the village. The villagers
depend upon these forests to meet their fuelwood needs. Income is generated by the owners of
the forest from the sale of khair trees every ten years and sale of bhabbar (grass for making ropes)
and fodder grass every year to contractors.

Towards community conservation

The 250 ha of protected forest were private forests until 1892, when a government programme
decided to club private forests into co-operatives in Kangra district for the purpose of checking
soil erosion. It took 47 years before it was officially brought under the government program and
registered as a Soil Conservation Co-operative in 1939. A Soil Conservation Co-operative Society
was formed consisting of the upper-caste community who owned the forests. The executive
committee was formed, consisting of 5 members who met twice a month. Some of the rules
followed by them included:
1. Seasonal closure for grass production
2. Enumeration of trees for felling
3. Rotational closure within the forest
4. Complete ban on grazing
5. Control of forest fires
A full-time guard for the forest is appointed to catch any offenders. The lower castes (80 per cent
of the village population) are allowed to take fuelwood for household use but have no participation
or share in the income from forests. Ban workers (traditional rope-makers) are especially affected
as they are not allowed to take bhabbar, which is auctioned to contractors.
case studies - himachal pradesh

Impacts of community effort

Protected forests support many species of wild animals, particularly leopards. This cooperative
has been useful for the members of the cooperative as it has led to improved management of the
forests, economies of scale in sale of forest products and reduction in transaction costs. For the
poor in the village, these forests provide a regular supply of fuelwood.

This case study has been compiled based on a questionnaire answered by Akshay Jasrotia,
Himalaya Bacho Samiti, Chamba, on 1 January 2001. We are extremely grateful to Satya
Prasanna Bambam for helpful contributions and comments on the first draft.

259
260 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

For more information contact:

Inderjit Singh, Secretary
Soil Conservation Society, Panjawar
Village Panjawar, Tehsil Haroli,
Dist. Una, HP, 177208

Himalaya Bachao Samiti

Vill Kamla, PO Garnota
Sub-tehsil Sihunta
Chamba 175207 HP
Jammu and Kashmir
Jammu and Kashmir - an introduction
Editor’s note: This chapter is a combination of an introductory section on the state of Jammu and Kashmir in
general, and then a more detailed section on conservation scenario, state history and current status of CCAs in
Changthang region of Ladakh. Details on the current status of CCAs in the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir could
not be compiled. Endnotes occur after the Ladakh section.

Location and biogeography

Jammu and Kashmir state constitutes the northern-most extremity of India. Situated between
32.17 ° and 36.58 ° north latitude and 73.26 ° and 80.30° east longitude, the total area of the
state is 2,22,236sq km including 78114sq km under the occupation of Pakistan and 42,685 sq kms
under that of China. The state is bounded by Pakistan, Afghanistan and China from the west to the
east. It is connected to the rest of the country through a 30 km long boundary with Punjab and
300 km long boundary with Himachal Pradesh. There is a sharp rise of altitude from 1000 feet to
28250 feet above the sea level within the state’s four degrees of latitude.
The Jammu and Kashmir region consists of four great mountain ranges of Himalayas: Karakoram,
Ladakh, Zanskar and Pirpanjal. The state is divided into 5 physiographic regions i.e. Trans-
Himalayas, Greater Himalayas, Lesser Himalayas, Shivaliks and Plains, which have been further
divided into 9 land forms:
1) Glaciers, 2) Hills and plateaus of Trans-Himalayas, 3) Hills of Greater Himalayas, 4) Hills of
Lesser Himalayas, 5) Hills of Shivaliks, 6) Narrow valleys, 7) Broad valleys, 8) Piedmont plains and
9) Alluvial plains.
The annual rainfall varies from region to region with 92.6 mm in Leh, 650.5 mm in Srinagar
and 1115.9 mm in Jammu. The climate varies from tropical in Jammu plains to semi-arctic cold in
Ladakh with Kashmir and Jammu mountainous tracts having temperate climatic conditions. Major
portions of Jammu and Kashmir state consist of the western Himalayas, which besides containing
many lofty mountain ranges with varying heights of 3000 to 6000 metres and above, also abound
in rivers, lakes, passes, glaciers, plateaus and plains. Indus, Ravi, Jhelum and Chenab are the
important rivers in the state.
The vegetation of Jammu region varies from sub-tropical to temperate alpine type; that of
Kashmir is moist temperate and moist alpine whereas that of Ladakh is of cold desert type having
unique diversity of plants and animals not seen elsewhere in the state.

Box 1: Forest types of Jammu and Kashmir

Category of forests Percentage (of the total forest) area

Himalayan moist temperate 44%
state chapter - jammu and kashmir

Alpine forests 28%

Himalayan dry temperate forests 7%
Sub-tropical dry deciduous forests 4%
Sub-tropical evergreen forests 3%
Sub-tropical pine forests 14%
Total forest area 21,267 or 9.57% of the total geographical
area
Source: Forest Survey of India, 2003.

Over 1,600 sq. km. area is under various kinds of water bodies and some of it notified as protected
under various categories. Whereas all water bodies in the valley are fresh water, and of small to
medium size, those in the Ladakh region are large and brackish in character. Major wetlands
which support unique elements of aquatic flora and fauna are Dal lake, Wular lake, Naranbagh,
Anchar lake, Nagin lake, Mansbal lake, Mirgund lake, Shallabugh lake, Haigam lake, Hokersar (in
Kashmir), Surinsar, Mansar (in Jammu) Pangong Tso, Tsomoriri and Tso kar (in Ladakh).

263
264 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Biodiversity
J&K has over 75 species of mammals of which
34 species are regarded as globally threatened
(as per the IUCN categories). J&K has over 350
species of birds of which 10 are threatened.
The state mammal fauna includes ibex, blue
sheep, red fox, snow leopard, Himalayan tahr,
Himalayan mouse hare, Himalayan palm civet,
marmot, Tibetan wild ass or kiang, musk deer,
markhor, brown bear, Himalayan black bear,
leopard, yak, Kashmir red deer or hangul,
Tibetan antelope and Tibetan gazelle.
A total of 3,054 species of plants have been
Limber Wildlife Sanctuary Photo: Rahul Kaul recorded from Kashmir Himalaya, 880 species
from Ladakh and 506 species from Jammu
region.

Socio-economic profile
The human population of the state according to 2001 census is 10,143,700. Livestock population
(1992) is 87.07 lakhs. Major languages spoken are Urdu, Kashmiri, Hindi, Dogri, Pahari, Ladakhi.
The natives of Jammu are both Hindus and Muslim by religion while Srinagar valley comprises of
predominantly Muslim population with small population of Hindus. The people of Ladakh province are
predominantly Buddhists and Muslims. Dogras, chibhalis, gujjars, bakker-wals, gaddis, kashmiris,
hanjis, mons, drokpas, Changpas, amchis, balti are the local ethnic groups. The scheduled caste
population in the state is 7.6% of the total population while scheduled tribes make up about 10.9%
of the total population.
The people of Jammu region are mainly farmers and traders. The Kashmiri Muslims have traditionally
been farmers, craftsmen, artisans and traders including those of the boatmen community, locally
called hanjis. People in Ladakh are of Tibetan origin and are mainly cultivators, farmers and
pastoralists. The educated class is also engaged in professions like medicine, engineering, teaching,
government jobs and others. Tourism is also an important means of livelihood in Kashmir as well
as Ladakh.

Administrative profile
The three regions of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh were brought together under a single state in
1846. The state has two capitals according to season: in summer (May-October) - Srinagar and
in winters (November-April), Jammu. The state consists of 14 districts, 59 tehsils, 119 blocks, 3
municipalities, 54 towns and notified area committees, 6477 inhabited villages and 281 uninhabited
villages.
J&K enjoys a special status on account of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. It has its own
constitution and various provisions of the acts, laws and regulations enforced by Government of
India are implemented in the state only after they are ratified by the State Legislature. The state
also has a mandate of making its own laws. For example the State has its own Forest Protection
Act, Wildlife Protection Act, etc.

Conservation
To protect the existing flora & fauna and their habitats, the state of Jammu and Kashmir has
established a network of 3 national parks (one each in the region of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh)
15 wildlife sanctuaries (6 in Jammu, 7 in Kashmir and 2 in Ladakh), 13 wildlife reserves (4 in
Jammu, 6 in Kashmir and 3 in Ladakh) and 12 wetland reserves (5 in Jammu, 6 in Kashmir and 1
in Ladakh) constituting an area of 15781sq km which is about 7% of the total geographical area in
the state. There are 15 conservation reserves in the state.
The total area planted up to 1999 by forest department under afforestation schemes is 0.38
million ha. Joint forest management (JFM) is being implemented in the state and currently there
are 1895 JFM committees in State established by joint efforts of the forest dept and villagers.
These committees are conserving an area of 79,546 ha.
 Jammu and Kashmir 265

With a high number of water bodies present, the diversity of wetland flora and fauna in the
state is high. In order to ensure their conservation, 4 Ramsar sites have been identified: Hokersar
Wetland, Wular Lake, Tsomoriri and Surinsar-Mansar Lakes. Wular is the largest freshwater lake in
India with extensive marshes of emergent and floating vegetation. Tsomoriri in Ladakh represents
the only breeding ground outside China for endangered blacknecked crane and barheaded geese.
The wetland is considered sacred by local Buddhist communities and the water of the lake is not
used by them. 9 more sites are further proposed to be Ramsar sites1. Additionally, the state is
home to 21 sites identified as Important Bird Areas (IBAs) by Indian Bird Conservation Network
(IBCN).2
Major factors contributing towards degradation of natural resource and life support systems are
intensive agriculture with over-exploitation of soils, construction of roads and hydroelectric projects,
timber felling, overgrazing, illegal trade in animal and plant products, increased urbanization and
industrialization. It is estimated that about 80 plant taxa and about 70 animal taxa have already
reached the endangered category and many more are in the vulnerable status category.

General information about the state has been compiled by Saili S. Palande of Kalpavriksh,
based on the following document: Directorate of Environment and Remote Sensing, Srinagar.
2003. Jammu and Kashmir State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Prepared under National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Ministry of Environment and Forests (Government of
India). Other sources for specific information are mentioned in the text.

Dachigam Wildlife Sanctuary Photo: Rahul Kaul

state chapter - jammu and kashmir
266 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Ladakh3 : Community Conservation in the High

Himalayan Changthang plains, Ladakh
Alka Sabharwal

1. Introduction
The Changthang plains in India are a biologically and culturally unique Himalayan ecosystem,
containing some of the world’s highest altitude pasturelands. They support a population of nomadic
pastoralists involved in producing one of the finest wool in the world. Nestled in the southeast part
of the Ladakh, at an elevation of 4,500m, these plains are spread over an area of 20,000sq km.
These plains are contiguous to the greater Changthang plains in Western Tibet which are similarly
known to support a fascinating diversity of alpine fauna and flora.
Human habitat in this fragile environment has existed for ages in close consonance with the
ecosystem. Since the past few decades the ecology of the Changthang plains in India has been
increasingly threatened by large scale changes which have occurred in the region , particularly after
an Indo-Chinese war in 1962. One critical habitat directly affected by this is the local pasturelands.
The various political-economic shifts in the region have shown an increased pressure/ demand on
these pasturelands.
The local population who successfully survived on nomadic pastoralism now find it difficult to
continue with their age old livelihood. Their local institutional arrangements governing pasture-land
management have undergone profound transformations in these last few decades. The regulatory
mechanisms which ensured that different pastures were grazed in different seasons have shown
a decline. The social institutions which supported the sustainable resource management practices
have also undergone significant changes with a direct impact on their resource use.
There are studies which have linked the depletion of wildlife with increase in local livestock
population4. The conflict over the habitat shared by the wild herbivores and the livestock is also
blamed to have been caused by a policy change in the wildlife conservation in the early 70s.
Similarly the unplanned tourism management and an exclusion of the local population in deriving
tourism benefits have seemingly created conditions for environmental degradation and are also
proving to be a threat to the local access and control over their resources.
The following sections will discuss the traditional pasture –land management systems and the
various changes that have affected them in the last few decades and how this contextualizes the
various constraints and opportunities for community based conservation activities in the region.

1.1 Ecological profile

The unique physical characteristics of
Changthang plains include very low rainfall, sub
freezing temperatures, extended winters, high
wind speed and intense solar radiation, turning
the area into a ‘high altitude cold desert’. The
valley floors are dotted with streams, marshes
and some oligotropic lakes. It is primarily around
these water sources that human and other
forms of life have survived. The wetlands in
the Changthang plains are important breeding
grounds of the bar-headed geese in India and
one of the only breeding grounds of the globally
threatened black-necked crane. These plains also Tibetan wild ass in Changthang Wildlife Sanctuary
support some of the country’s most endangered Photo: Sujatha Padmanabhan
species of mammals such as the kiang or Tibetan wild
ass, snow leopard, Eurasian lynx, blue sheep, and Tibetan argali.

1.2 Socio-economic profile

As per the census of 2001, Ladakh had a population of 233,0005 and the population estimated
 Jammu and Kashmir 267

in Changthang region was around 13,044. These

plains are inhabited by a nomadic community
of Changpa herders who are highly dependent
on livestock for their basic food, income and
social exchange. They specialize in rearing high
altitude breeds of sheep, goats, yaks and horses
particularly suited to the Changthang ecosystem.
The Rupshu region of Changthang comprises of
the two settlements of Korzog and Samad; this
has 268 households of herders with a population
of 1439 who own nearly 67,881 head of livestock,
of which 90% are sheep and goats, and 10% are
yaks and horses6.
Trade exchanges related to livestock and Agro-pastoralism is one of the mainstays for most
villagers in Ladakh Photo: Sujatha Padmanabhan
livestock products represent the major sources
of livelihood for the Changpa herders. Traditionally, livestock produce like wool and meat were
bartered in large quantities for cultivated produce from neighbouring agricultural communities
in Lahaul, Spiti and Zanskar. The Changpa herders also form the only group of pastoralists in
India who produced and traded world famous cashmere (pashmina) wool. Traditionally the wool
was sold to Kashmiri traders through middle men who traveled to the Changthang plains for its
procurement.7

2. Changes in traditional resource access and control

An assured access and control over the resources is fundamental for a livelihood to sustain. The
Changpa herders have experienced several shifts in their customary rights of gaining access and
control over the Changthang pasturelands. These shifts are important to highlight since they have
a profound effect on their present day pasture-land management strategies.

2.1 Pre- and post-1947

Historically the Rupshu pasturelands in Changthang plains were part of the Ladakh kingdom. The
present inhabitants in Rupshu claim that their territorial boundaries are defined through markers
on the ground by their ascendants and are respected by their neighbouring communities. As in the
legend narrated by Tsering Dorjee, the erstwhile ruler of Rupshu:
“Tsering Tashi Namgyal, a forefather of Tsering Dorjee migrated from Tibet many generations
back. He was one of the heirs of jingeer lineage of Kham located in south east province of Tibet.
He left his house following a political dispute. On reaching the Rupshu region of Changthang which
was part of the Stok kingdom, the then king of Stok appointed him as Rupshu Gowa after a test
of his strength. This was the time Rupshu territories were defined extending from Lankpo- Na Mt.
Kailash in north, Chumur in east and Yagang in west and Sarchu in south” 8
The traditional gowa was considered to be responsible for ensuring protection of these territories
through regulating pasture allocations and use. The local herders also paid customary levies to the
state chapter - jammu and kashmir

king of Stok for using the pasturelands and also tended to a number of the king’s livestock.
In 1947, when Ladakh became an integral part of the Republic of India, the king of Ladakh
and the traditional gowa lost much of their power. These pasturelands were demarcated as the
government land in the official records. According to the local herders, these political changes in
the ownership and regulation of their pasturelands never brought any alteration to their traditional
access and control and they had continued to pay their annual levies to the king of Stok through
their traditional gowa.

2.2 The Indo-China war of 1962

The 1962 war brought a first threat to the territorial rights of the Changpa herders.The
Changthang plains in India are located on the international borders between India and China
and this strategic location makes them susceptible to any change in the political climate between
the two countries. After the 1962 war between India and China, both the countries decided to
formalize their international borders and as a consequence the Rupshu herders were restricted to
access their winter pastures lying in Tibet. The war also had an impact on their summer pastures-
268 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

lands located on the Indian side of the borders, with a sizeable influx of refugees from Tibet and a
large scale army deployment crowding their already shrunken pasturelands.
The lost winter pastures played a vital role in the overall livelihood security of Changpas and
despite the ban, a few herders continued to access certain parts of their winter pastures through
smuggling over borders, though was constantly discouraged by the strict border security. The Tibetan
refugees, who fled to India after Chinese occupation of Tibet, were cordially accommodated on the
summer pasturelands by the Rupshu herders given the social alliances and religious affinities with
them. The Indian army deployments were detested, but left with no legal safeguards to negotiate
their rights over the pasturelands with ‘outsiders’, the army occupation of their pasturelands was
unwillingly accommodated despite their shrinking resource base.

2.3 Changes in the political economy of Ladakh

The transformations occurring in the pasture-land management, primarily as a consequence of
the war, were further exacerbated by the various political and economic transitions occurred in
the Changthang plains, including a new government interest in the region and the integration of
Changthang into Ladakh politics. After the war a flow of development resources were offered to the
region by the government in the form of road building, health and education facilities , drought relief,
hay and fodder production, winter shelters for livestock, crossbred species of livestock, subsidized
food supplies, and government jobs etc. Similarly the significant changes in the Ladakh politics
(emergence of Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council in 1995 demanding a separate union
territory status from the state of Jammu and Kashmir) also made Changthang to play an important
role given a perpetual interest by the central government in the region.9 These politically driven
changes have had an adverse bearing on the customary pasture-land management strategies
since Changpas remained no longer the sole custodians of the Changthang resources and share
them with various other stakeholders who have overlapping and sometimes conflicting interests
in the local resources.

2.4 Changthang Wildlife Sanctuary (WLS) and tourism

The wildlife and wetland conservation efforts have added a new dimension to the traditional
resource use in Changthang. Unlike the rest of the country, there are no reserve forests in Ladakh
and the Protected Areas provide the only legal mechanism for conservation. In 1987, around 20%
comprising of 4000sq.km. of the Changthang plains was declared a wildlife sanctuary under section
17 of the Jammu and Kashmir Wildlife Protection Act, 1978. The Sanctuary included the entire
catchments of the Indus river from Hanle to Pangong Tso up to the Chinese border. Recently, in
December of 2002, Tso Moriri, was also declared a Ramsar World Heritage site10 emphasizing its
global biodiversity value.
Followed by the conservation initiatives, the Changthang region was also opened to tourism in
1994 with its three high altitude lakes as prime tourist attractions. The unplanned tourist activities,
which are insensitive to the local environment, have shown its adverse impact in the form of
pasture degradation and contamination of the water sources through its camping and trekking
activities.
The exclusion of the local herders in the planning process of the conservation initiatives has
created a condition of mutual mistrust between the wildlife department and the herders. The
conservation activities are perceived to restrict the local resource consumption activities like
fencing by the wildlife department and are seen as an attack on their customary territorial rights.
Similarly the indiscriminate camping and grazing by the trekking animals is often objected by the
herders but in vain as their power to negotiate is constantly challenged by the tour operators in
the absence of any legal title to their pasture-land.
All together these processes have challenged the local customary rights over the Changthang
pastures and have left the Changpa herders vulnerable to the loss of access and control over their
survival resources. Combined with a decline in available pastures and increased political-economic
interference, the aspirations of the local herders to maintain their pastoral livelihoods are seriously
affected. The number of herders who are continuing with their traditional pastoral activities is
steadily declining, which has a direct bearing on their customary claims over their pasturelands,
defined through local allocations and regular use.
 Jammu and Kashmir 269

3. Local pasture-land management

The Changpa herders have evolved their pasture-land management over generations and this has
sustained their survival in this desert through an optimal resource use. Their management practices
are a sum total of their collective ownership, utilization strategies and regulatory mechanisms
characterized by institutional arrangements criss-crossing the Changpa’s social and political life.
Following is a brief documentation of these strategies and practices which the local herders have
been using to competently manage their pasturelands. These strategies have weakened in the last
few decades with Changthang plains experiencing an amalgamation of war, political and economic
changes.

3.1 Common ownership of resources

The collective ownership has proven to be a prudent way to manage the sparsely productive
Changthang plains in terms of efficiency, equity and resource sustainability. This collective use is
efficiently managed and sustained through regulatory mechanisms which helped to keep a check
on an overuse of the resources and also avoid conflicts.

3.2 Pasture-land management strategies

3.2.1 Nomadism
Nomadism is fundamental to a sustainable pasture-land management, especially in the high
altitude regions like Changthang with marked seasonality. These seasonal migrations provide
spatial separation between the pastures used in different seasons and ensure a regular supply of
fodder for the livestock throughout the year. The time-partitioning and the extensive ‘distribution’
of livestock over a very large area to feed on fresh grasses, have helped to keep a check on
overgrazing and supported a healthy replenishment of the precious grasses for the next season.
For the Changpa herders their regular nomadic movements also reinforced their territorial rights,
in the absence of any visible borders separating different pasturelands in the Changthang plains.

3.2.2 Livestock Management

The key to successful survival as pastoral
nomads in the harsh environment has been
a highly skillful and efficient management
of their varied livestock which the Changpas
have evolved.
a. Herd size: Herd size is an important
aspect of pastoral production since it
has to be optimal to fulfill the needs
of a certain human population and
also required to be in strict balance
with the limited grazing resources. The
state chapter - jammu and kashmir

Changpa herders are of the opinion

that overstocking is an inappropriate
dependence on the pastures and cannot Herds of livestock belonging to the nomadic Changpas near
survive. Therefore they do not have Pangong Lake, Changthang Photo: Sujatha Padmanabhan
traditional regulatory mechanisms to
control herd size and every herder is free to realize full potential to grow the herd size within
the ‘given’ resources. It is during the onset of winter months that every household needs to
decide to reduce its herd size and community at large does not play a role in the process.
The number of livestock culled is dependent on many factors. The most important of them is
the household’s capability to rear a particular size of the herd and that entirely depends on the
presence of competent household members available for herd rearing. The second important
factor is the condition of winter grasses and third is the household’s need for cash or meat in
a particular year. These factors vary every year and from one household to another. Therefore
amount of livestock culling fluctuates every year as also the overall livestock population in the
community.
270 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

b. Herd composition: A mixed herd composition was always beneficial for the local herders, as
different livestock chose different types of grasses and a herder could optimize within the less
productive and variable fodder resources of Changthang plains. Yaks are primarily dependent
on caragana, a shrub, whereas goats and sheep did not prefer this grass species and graze
mainly on bol, shyot, longma, nyalo, gyapshen, burtze, which are less coarse grasses. A mixed
herd also produces most goods to fulfill a range of survival needs of their nomadic lifestyle from
food, clothing, shelter and transport.
c. Rotational grazing: The livestock is segregated on the basis of kind, age and gender for
grazing on different pastures. This practice has helped to distribute the grazing pressure
on a widespread area and also provided suitable grasses for the particular livestock. These
mechanisms drew successfully on varied micro environments found in the Changthang plains.
Different pastures and locations hold different species of fodder plants depending on terrain,
topography, availability of water, soil conditions and slope aspects. The manpower assigned to
perform herding duties for different types of grazing is also specialized and different age groups/
genders in the family perform specific herding duties. For example younger children may assist
the main family tent in tending to the grazing of sheep and goat whereas the young single
members may live alone in higher pastures and look after yaks and horses. This segregation of
herds and herding duties is considered an important pasture-land management strategy. Like
the marshy meadows hold certain grass species whereas the slopes or rocky terrain contain
others. The herders have particularly assigned manpower to perform these practices and it was
considered an important pasture-land management strategy, especially in winter months when
grasses are scanty. Mostly a single member of the household would perform this duty and pitch
his/her tent with the herd much away from the main encampment.

3.3 Regulatory institutions

Many regulatory institutions, both explicitly defined and culturally implicit, have developed in the
Changpa society to govern their pastureland management strategies.
The pasturelands are a dynamic and variable common resource and its management and
distribution amongst the members of the community entails a consideration of a multitude of
factors. Local patterns of resource use can vary widely from year to year given natural variability
in climate, precipitation and forage growth. Therefore the migratory schedules and pasture
allocations to households are always decided mutually from season to season. The community has
to arrive at these decisions through negotiations which is possible only due to age old institutional
arrangements that the Changpas have evolved and which are binding to all members of the
community.
3.3.1. Political institutions
a. The gowa: The gowa, an elected political head acts as a custodian of all the rules and
regulations laid down and his role is pivotal to ascertain the migration patterns and pasture-
land management. Changpas have a tradition of community meetings held under the gowa’s
authority for all community decisions including the use of the pasturelands.
The gowa’s prime responsibility in this context is to organize and coordinate these community
meetings for migratory decisions and pasture allocations and to see that they are held fairly
and their decisions are just. It is also the responsibility of the gowa to ensure the compliance of
the assigned pasture location, and migration dates. He is entrusted with the powers to assign
fines and penalties for any noncompliance.
The gowa is very actively involved in overseeing the welfare of the community which for most
part of the year is spread over a vast landscape. Since this occupies most of gowa’s time, his
own livestock is taken care of by the community on a rotational basis. He is also supported by
three personnel to carry out these duties:
Gyatpo: responsible to solve disputes in the absence of gowa but the final decision in complex
matters is reserved with the gowa.
Kootwal: assigned to decide chitpa or fines on any deviation or breach.
Lorapa: Responsible to report defaulters.
b. The community meetings: To deal with quantitative and qualitative local conditions of pastures
due to seasonal and annual climatic variations, the local herders have negotiated their access
 Jammu and Kashmir 271

rights frequently amongst themselves through community meetings. They organize 4 major
community meetings (around every equinox and solstice) in a year for internal agreements over
their yearly migrations. The meetings attended by everyone, discuss the seasonal changes and
specific indicators like melting or freezing of water bodies, snow condition on the mountain tops,
arrival and departures of the migratory birds etc. to assess the condition of available pastures
for the forthcoming seasons. This is translated into the time schedules for migration and to fix
the carrying capacity of the pastures.
Pasture allocation amongst the households of the community is also decided jointly in these
meetings depending upon the herd sizes, manpower available to a household and the rotational
social or religious duties a household is engaged in a particular season.The meetings are
also overseen by the head monk of the Gompa who grants the moral seal of approval to the
negotiations. This is significant since religion is an important aspect of Changpa life and the
religious validation of rules and regulations for pasture-land management is instrumental in
their application.
c. Fine or chitpa: To ensure compliance to the ordained migration schedule and the assigned
pastures, the community has a code of rules which discourage deviation. It being mandatory
for all the families to shift from one pasture to another on the assigned dates, failing to do so
results in penalties in the form of heads of livestock or community labor. These rules are relaxed
only under exceptional cases like childbirth. There are not many instances when these penal
rules need to be exercised because the effectiveness of the collective management of pastures
has always encouraged compliance.

3.3.2. Family Institutions

The family household is the economic unit of the Changpa society. As an independent viable
economic unit a household needs to possess a certain minimum livestock and working hands. The
family development cycle of the Changpas aligns effectively with their scarce resources.
a Inheritance through primogeniture: The inheritance of family assets amongst Changpas
has followed a practice of primogeniture where the eldest child be it a son or a daughter (or
the eldest two sons in case of a fraternal polyandrous situation) inherits the family possessions
and major portion of the family livestock on marriage and becomes the main household. The
rest of family becomes a satellite family unit with limited social and economic functions. Since
a certain critical mass of herd size is essential for viability this ensured that instead of a family
unit dividing into many non viable smaller units, each with pressure to increase its herd to a
viable size, a family just progressed into another main household.This mechanism helped limit
the number of main households and thus major herds in the community. This was a significant
tool for managing the distribution of pasture resources in the community.
b. Polyandrous household units: Traditionally, Changpa herders have lived in fraternal
polyandrous units regarded as appropriate social custom for survival of the community in the
limited resource base of Changthang. These family units would provide the manpower essential
to perform a number of pastoral tasks besides tending the livestock such as the trade expeditions
to neighbouring agricultural communities, salt expeditions, social or religious duties. The
presence of two men in the family could distribute the diverse activities and make the family
unit economically more viable in comparison to a smaller monogamous unit with less livestock.
state chapter - jammu and kashmir

This custom combined with inheritance through primogeniture has been instrumental in limiting
the population and restricting the number of households dependent on the pasturelands as also
the total number of livestock in Changthang to manageable proportions.
c. Monastic life: Another important custom is the donation of at least one child from the satellite
household to the monastery for religious training as a monk. Monks usually lead celibate lives
in monastery without marrying and starting a family. Besides performing a social and religious
function this custom performs an important economic function as being another instrument to
limit the size of human population, the number of main households and hence the number of
livestock in the community.
The above strategies and practices to manage and use the pasturelands demonstrate the
competence of traditional wisdom to use the natural resources. The political and economic changes
in Changthang plains, which have negatively affected these strategies, now pose a challenge to the
viability of nomadic pastoralism as a livelihood and their role in sustainability of their ecosystem.
As an effect, there are emerging divergent pastoral livelihood practices and reduced pastoral/
nomadic mobility which are the major constraints to the community conservation initiatives.
272 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

4. Opportunities and constraints

4.1 Constraints
4.1.1. Tenurial security
Government policies designate the Changthang plains as state owned without supplying well
defined or well enforced policies regarding their access and use. While the Changthang pasturelands
are constitutionally protected from privatization, the local herders cannot legally prevent “outsiders”
from gaining access to their pastures. Being a strategic location on the international borders
Changpas have already been affected by the assertion of territories by India and China. The
extensive establishment of border security forces and the consequent restrictions of access to
some of their pastures have challenged their traditional territorial ownership. This dilution of their
tenurial security and customary rights of access and control over the pasturelands in Changthang
is a main constraint to community conservation initiatives.
4.1.2 Changes in pastoral livelihood strategies
The years after the war have seen a slow breakdown of long-standing systems for management
of pasturelands. The loss of access to winter pastures in Tibet coupled with insufficient government
support to supplement winter fodder, has been a principal hurdle for local herders to sustain their
traditional forms of pastoralism. The reducing viability of pastoral livelihood in Changthang is
reflected in the potentially unsustainable changes occurring in their present day livelihoods and
pastoral strategies.
a. Declining nomadism: After the shrinking of the winter pastures, most of the pastoral
households tend to remain closer to their settlements or at locations where the access to social
services and markets is more assured. This is true, especially for the poorer households with
smaller herds which are more affected by livestock mortality during harsh winter conditions and
are dependent on the external supplements for their pastoral survival.
Then there are herders who only move in winter months. Most of these herders supplement
their pastoral incomes by engaging in other jobs in summers and cannot tend to their livestock
all year round.
There are many herders who have migrated to Leh for economic reasons but their livestock
remain on the pastures either tended by relatives or hired labour who are often not so keen to
move extensively and prefer to remain close to the roads or the settlements.
This marked decline in the pastoral mobility have led to altered distribution of grazing pressure
and have an adverse impact on the pastoral environment.
Leasing winter pastures in close proximity, from the neighbouring communities have also
reduced pastoral mobility and the remote pasture locations remain under-utilized and get
appropriated by other herding communities. For instance the Korzog herders had stopped
occupying their traditional pastures located close to Sarchu in the years after the war (on the
borders between the states of Jammu and Kashmir (Ladakh) and Himachal Pradesh), which are
now occupied by Gaddi herders from Himachal Pradesh.
b. Changes in livestock-herd size and herd composition
Herd size: According to the local herders their herd sizes have significantly dropped after losing
their precious winter pastures to China. At present the maximum herd size per household does
not exceed 300 as compared to a 1000 in earlier times11.
Beside access to appropriate pasture resources, an important factor to owning large herds is
the availability of competent family members within a household to take care of the various
pastoral pursuits. With a decline in polyandrous units, not every household is able to rear a
large herd.
There is also a growing variation of herd sizes owned by different households across the community.
There are households which find themselves incapable to grow their herds to economically viable
numbers in the presence of declining social support and regulatory institutions. The smaller
herd sizes have reduced the economic viability of the pastoral livelihoods, and the Changpas’
involvement in pastoral practices and management of the pasturelands has proportionately
decreased.
Herd composition: Traditionally, the local herders preferred to own a large number of sheep as
it was a natural choice attributed to the hardy nature of the animal to withstand harsh winter
conditions of Changthang. Sheep wool could be used and woven into their clothes and rugs or
it could be bartered with agricultural communities for survival goods like barley grain. On the
contrary goats were less favoured as the pashmina hair is delicate and could not be woven on
 Jammu and Kashmir 273

their basic looms and needed to be traded outside their traditional trading villages only for cash.
Moreover as compared to sheep the young goats are more vulnerable in winters and need extra
tending to and feeding.
With a shift in the geo-political situation of the Changthang plains, the traditional barter exchange
of sheep wool with the neighbouring villages has declined considerably whereas the pashmina
trade has increased through the government support and market access. In order to boost the
trade, the government has initiated various livestock improvement programmes and introduced
an All Changthang Pashmina Growers Cooperative society Ltd. in the region. Recently a multi
crore project for mechanized pashmina de-hairing has also been proposed for the region with
assistance from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
Due to this government policy to support for the development of pashmina production, many
herders are lured by the pashmina trade and have taken up goat rearing in a proactive manner.
Intense goat grazing is divergent to the traditional livestock management practices and entails
a new dimension to the pastoral livelihoods in Changthang. Its economic benefits are still
awaited by the herders since pashmina is a high stakes trade and involves a number of middle
men thinning the flow of profit to the herders. However the ecological impact of increased goat
rearing is already under observation with a few studies blaming intense goat grazing to be
responsible for extinction of certain wild ungulates like tibetan gazelle from the region12.
4.1.3. Disappearing regulatory institutions
The authority of the gowa, the customary institution that ensured compliance with decisions
regarding resource use, has weakened in the last few years. The herders tend to question the
authority and wisdom of the gowa for facilitating a judicious use of the pasture resources. There
may be various reasons to the decline of a competent use of the pastures given the drastic changes
which Changthang has experienced but according to the local herders, the gowa is expected to
perform despite all odds. On the other hand, the democratically elected gowa has to represent the
community to the local government in Leh, the deployed armed forces and fulfill the administrative
functions in the block office at Nyoma. The gowa is therefore frequently traveling and this also
affords him less time to perform his traditional role to regulate pasture use and ensure compliance
to pasture allocations.
All this has resulted in a downgrading of his role and the social status accorded to his position.
To be an elected gowa is no longer a sought after community role. As a result in the Samad
community , herders now gamble to choose a gowa and the tenure of his duty is reduced to one
year in comparison to the earlier practice of three years .
Similarly, the polyandrous household units are on decline with a conversion to monogamous
units and the number of children donated to monastic institutions is also decreasing with strong
implications on the population size and sustainable resource management of the community.
Thus, a decline in economic viability of herding as a sole livelihood strategy, changing social
institutions, reduced nomadic movements and changes in herd management have undermined the
role of traditional regulatory institutions that ensured a sustainable care of the pasturelands. This
has an adverse impact on the relationship between pastoral livelihoods and the local ecology.
a. Barter exchange: The essential barter exchange of pastoral goods with cultivated produce
of barley has started to diminish because of the Changpa herders having not enough pastures
state chapter - jammu and kashmir

to rear a viable size of livestock to make their month long trade journey to the agricultural
communities worthwhile.
In response, the increased dependence on market and the Public Distribution System to fulfill
their basic food needs, create an extra pressure to earn cash. Therefore the livelihood practices
of Changpas have changed and pastoralism is no longer relied upon as the sole source of income
and within that, there is a shifted focus towards increased goat rearing for cash returns.
b. Increased conflict: The principal sources of pressure related to changing livelihood dynamics,
including rising levels of asset inequality in livestock holdings, population concentration around
the settlements, reduced access to the pasture resources, have contributed greatly to the
incidences of conflict amongst the local herders. These conflicts have profound consequences
for the poorer households as they often are the first ones to drop out of the traditional livelihood
activities, with serious concerns for the social cohesiveness of the community. Besides intra-
community conflict, the disputes with other communities have also risen with shrunken pastures.
When Samad herders started to spend more time on their pastures in Indian side (around the
Regul Tso) as compared to the several months they spent at Skakyung pastures in Tibet, the
other pastoral community who originally occupied these pastures on the Indian side in their
absence resisted their presence, leading to one of the most prominent and lingering conflicts
274 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

within the Changpa community.

c. Human-wildlife conflict: Many conservationists have recently recorded dramatic decrease in
wildlife numbers in Ladakh. There are a few studies on the ecology of the Changthang plains
which have held overstocking responsible for the habitat degradation of the local wild herbivores.
In one estimate approximately 1,40,000 domestic livestock is believed to be competing with an
estimated 5000 wild ungulates in the Changthang region13. The paucity of knowledge on high
altitude ecology, especially relating to pasturelands, makes it difficult to conclude that increase
in number of livestock is the cause of the dwindling number of wild ungulates in the region as
is incessantly mentioned in these studies.
The region has also experienced other changes like large scale army deployments, extensive road
network and increasing tourism in the wildlife habitats in recent years besides the geoclimatic
changes affecting wildlife habitats. Amongst a variety of factors which can affect the wildlife
populations, the current data of livestock population in the region is one information easily
available from government records and is simplistically used to draw a linear relation with
wildlife numbers giving rise to the fallacy that increase in livestock population conflicts with the
habitat of wild ungulates.
The absence of definitive historical information/data on the livestock and wildlife populations as
well as the gaps in the census methodologies of the official livestock figures is partly responsible
for the confusion.
Local herders see nothing extraordinary in the present livestock population in the historical
context as even though number of independent households has seen some increase in
Changthang, the average livestock holdings have decreased significantly.
After a wildlife hunting ban by the Jammu and Kashmir state government in 1978, the local
herders believe that number of wolves have increased in their pasturelands increasing the
livestock depredation rate. Similarly the herders also believe that this ban has increased the
population of the kiangs — which were traditionally hunted by the Tibetan refugees — and are
a cause of overgrazing of their reserve winter pastures. The Changpas have also repeatedly put
in requests to the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council to fence their winter pastures
to safeguard them from kiangs. While the ecological studies state that following the growing
integration of local economy with the better developed cash markets, the herders are less
tolerant towards kiangs and it is increasingly seen as a competitor of their livestock14
Some studies have attributed dwindling numbers of nesting black-necked cranes to the intensive
seasonal movement of the Changpas. According to the study the herders have begun establishing
their tents too close to the nesting sites of the cranes and there are many incidences of eggs
and chick predation by domestic dogs. The local herders deny the allegation and according to
them, the thung thung karma (a local name for black-necked crane) always lay their eggs on
islands in water and it is difficult for their dogs to reach them.
The Korzog herders recently protested a move by the state wildlife department to fence the
shores of Tso Moriri at Peldo –a relatively new breeding ground of blacknecked cranes, claiming
that such fence would restrict movement to their winter pastures. According to the wildlife
department, the fencing is entirely meant to restrict the increasing tourist vehicular traffic and
tourist camping and not to stop the access of
the local herders to the pastures. It is interesting
to note that more than a kilometer long fencing
does not restrict the access of the livestock and is
also not effective in stopping the tourist vehicles
from approaching close to the nesting sites.
4.1.4. Poaching
Species like Tibetan antelope were previously
listed in Schedule II of the Jammu and Kashmir
Wild Life (Protection) Act, which made trade or use
of derivatives possible under license. On the 6th
of May 2002, the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly
Local people meet to discuss the settlement of rights placed the Tibetan antelope in Schedule I of the
process initiated in Changthang Wildlife Sanctuary in Act, giving it the highest level of protection and
2007 Photo: Ashish Kothari making any use of its derivatives punishable
by law. The Tibetan antelope, an endangered
species also listed in the CITES Appendix I, making international trade illegal, is still hunted for
its precious wool. The international border between China and India is a crucial trade route and
it attracts herders to indulge in the practice. Many wildlife experts have expressed that the near
 Jammu and Kashmir 275

extinction of Tibetan antelopes in Indian Changthang is a result of extreme poaching.

4.1.5. Large-scale army deployment
Large scale deployments of security forces and their infrastructure in the form of underground
barracks, metal roads, fences, live ammunition exercises and a number of army convoys after the
1962 war have had its ecological impact in the region. Confiscation of land resources for the army
infrastructure where there is a heavy army deployment is detrimental factor to the local resource
management practices and also to the wildlife. Army personnel are also known to have been
involved in hunting wild life and endangered species of birds like black necked cranes in the past.
In a recent move, The Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) established their post on the shores of
Tso Moriri lake and in close proximity to the nesting sites of migratory birds like bar headed geese
and brahmini ducks. This ITBP establishment has also been instrumental in increased vehicular
activities since it is also a recreational site for army families based in Leh and is another factor
disturbing the breeding grounds of the migratory birds. Since the Tso Moriri shores are not on the
international borders the Korzog herders find no justification for an ITBP post in their midst.
There is no mechanism in which the army troops hold any consultation with the local herders to
explain their strategic movements before establishing themselves in these pasturelands.
4.1.6. Insensitive state development programmes
The state development programmes in Changthang often neglect to support the herders in the
areas critical to the security and sustainability of their pastoral livelihoods. Whether it is subsidized
food supplies or health and education, these social services are designed and implemented without
being sensitive to the lifestyle of the local herders. One of the major issue with these social
provisions being that they are made available at fixed locations given a general unwillingness of
government officials to walk up to the far flung campsites of the herders. With the crucial role of
government provisions in local household economy, it is the herders who end up traveling often
to their settlement at Korzog or Thugje to access these services. This has contributed to reduced
nomadic movements and tendency among many small herders to remain close to the settlements
which raises the pressure on resources like water and pastures around these settlements.
4.1.7. Insensitive tourism
Changthang was opened to tourism in the year 1994 and the number of tourists visiting the
region is increasing every year from a couple of hundreds in 1996 to more than three thousand in
the year 200015.
In a recent participatory research initiative by WWF-India, in Changthang plains, it was found
that the herders have following concerns vis-a-vis tourism:
• Inappropriate garbage disposal, polluting their wetlands and pastures. They cite the death of a
yak after it ingested plastic garbage as an example.
• There is no defined road or trail, and tourist vehicles race around their pastures and trample
precious grasses. The herders say grasses now smell of petrol and diesel and their livestock
cannot eat them.
• Tourists arriving on foot come with pack horses. These horses overgraze their pasture sites.
state chapter - jammu and kashmir

• Tourists camping close to water sources and the cooking, washing and defecation by them leads
to serious problems of pollution to their already meager water sources.
• Tour operators are uncooperative and do not even pay the small mandatory camping fee
introduced by the local herders.
• Cultural traits picked up by the young generation through exposure to insensitive visitors are
resented by locals.
• Tourists are intrusive, exploitative and patronizing.

4.2. Opportunities
At the broader level, the perseverance of traditional wisdom of Changpa community in order to
harmoniously live in the Changthang ecosystem entirely depends on the future of their pastoral
livelihoods. Various threats to their nomadic pastoralism through encroachments, insensitive
government programmes or decline of traditional resource use practices can only worsen the land
degradation and weaken pastoral livelihoods. Therefore there is a need to:
276 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

1. Revalidate the traditional pastoral systems and institutions that empower local herders and
foster stewardship. In the absence of any other viable livelihoods in the Changthang plains, this
is a timely step since important systemic forms still exist amongst their herding strategies to
rebuild their resource management practices.
2. Provide a legal framework to grant and guarantee tenurial security of their pastures. Collective
action is important for the Changpa herders who live in marginal environments and sustain the
resource use through regulatory management systems. This basic element for the management
of natural resources is through the collective action of communities, and so it is critical to get
right the organizational arrangements, as well as securing rights over common resources.
3. Strengthen pastoral economy through policies that support livestock take off, marketing, value
addition and risk management.
4. Use ecotourism to diversify the local economy and not as a prime livelihood opportunity. The local
herders do not want tourists to encroach on their resources, as they believe that they are not able
to optimize benefits from this enterprise and instead find themselves accumulating losses with
uncontrolled resource degradation through pollution, grass trampling, social disruption, etc.
5. Promote trans-boundary harmony between India and China which results in trade and livelihood
enhancement, and allows cross-border movement of livestock to relieve grazing pressure on
the pasturelands.
6. Facilitate more effective communication channels among those who develop policy, development
workers, researchers, local herders; this can be achieved through strengthening the networks
and collaborative efforts among diverse stakeholder groups.
7. Enhance research programmes on the trans-Himalayan ecosystems. There are many problems
with the available information on these ecosystems. Such information is scanty and is not
enough to be able to facilitate a conservation strategy. The high costs and difficult physical
conditions involved in such kind of research are also discouraging. The available knowledge
base on the high altitude Himalayas has less relevance to the larger issues like biodiversity etc.
and the existing studies largely ignore a holistic view towards these ecosystems. There is also
inadequate coordination amongst the various researchers or institutions working on different
facets of the high altitude areas. These and other gaps in the knowledge base regarding the
trans-Himalayan ecosystems need to be filled.
8. There is an urgent need for inter-disciplinary research to be critically informed by local
participation both in the study programmes as well as the resultant policy process. Holistic
scientific analysis will help the conservation strategies to be more informed so that policies can
be people friendly and effective rather than esoteric or theoretical.

The section on Ladakh has been written in 2002 and updated in 2008 by Alka Sabharwal,
Independent Researcher.

Endnotes
1
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani. 2006. Potential Ramsar Sites in India. IBCN:BNHS and Birdlife International, UK,
Mumbai.
2
Source: M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani. 2004. Important Bird Areas of India: Priorities of Conservation-IBCN, BNHS,
UK: Bird Life International, Mumbai.
3
For more information see Sabharwal, Alka, 1996. Changpas: Nomads of Rupshu. An Anthropological Study on
Ecology, Economy and Exchange. Unpublished M.Phil thesis, Delhi University.
4
Bhatnagar,Y.V, Wangchuk,R., & Mishra,C.2006. Decline of the Tibetan gazelle Procapra pictican data in Ladakh
India,.Oryx 40 (2):229-232.
5
Humbert-Droz, B. and Dawa, S. (ed). 2004. Biodiversity of Ladakh: Strategy and Action Plan. Prepared under the
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of
India. Ladakh Ecological Development Group and Sampark, New Delhi.
6
Block Development Office. 2002. Nyoma. Leh District, India
7
Rizvi, J. 1999. Trans Himalyan Caravans-Merchant Princes and Peasant Traders in Ladakh. Oxford University Press,
New Delhi. India.
8
Sabharwal, A. 1996. Changpas: Nomads of Rupshu. An Anthropological Study on Ecology, Economy and Exchange.
Unpublished M.Phil thesis.Delhi University.
9
Vanbeek. M. 2002. ‘Dangerous Liasions: Hindu Nationalism and Buddhist Radicalism in Ladakh’ in Religious
Radicalism and Security in South Asia ed. by. Robert G. Wirsing, Satu Limaye, and Mohan Malik. Asia Pacific Centre
 Jammu and Kashmir 277

for Security Studies (APCSS), Honolulu, USA.

10
WWF-India. 2002. Tso Moriri, Jammu & Kashmir: India’s Ramsar Sites, A Fact File on India’s Wetlands of International
Importance. WWF-India and Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India.
11
During one of the PRA exercises at the Korzog settlement. 2002. WWF, Delhi, India
12
Bhatnagar,Y.V, Wangchuk,R., & Mishra,C. 2006. Decline of the Tibetan gazelle Procapra pictican data in Ladakh
India,.Oryx 40 (2):229-232.
13
Kitchloo,N.A. 1997. Unified Ecosystem Management Plan for the Changthang Wilderness area. Department of
Wildlife Protection, J&K Govt.
14
Bhatnagar,Y.V., Wangchuk,R., Prins,Herbert.H.T.,Wieren, Sipke.E., Mishra,C. 2006. Perceived Conflicts between
Pastoralism and Conservation of Kiang Equus Kiang in the Ladakh Trans Himalaya, India, Environ. Manage. Published
online, 2006 September 2.
15
The Hindu. 2003. July

state chapter - jammu and kashmir

 CCA/J&K/CS1/Baramula/Garoora/Forest protection

Garoora, Baramula
Background
Forest officials in Jammu and Kashmir accept that there is an alarming decrease in Jammu
and Kashmir’s forest cover. Indiscriminate felling of trees, political patronage of forest leases
and mushrooming of timber smugglers has brought Jammu and Kashmir close to loosing most
of its forests. Against such a disappointing background, Garoora village, located on the banks of
Walur Lake (Asia’s largest fresh water lake) is a shining sign of hope. The village has been able to
regenerate its, once denuded forests, thanks to the wisdom of village elders.

Towards community conservation

Around the year 1990, villagers of Garoora gathered to discuss a serious problem that that was
threatening the existence of their village. Flash floods in the adjoining mountain stream were
destroying the crops in the village. Minimum rain in the catchment area of the lake was enough
to cause, these previously unheard of flash floods, which would wash away a whole year’s crop.
Villagers were considering a possibility of migrating to another site.
While a heated discussion was proceeding, an elder resident Lalla Lone reminded the villagers
that the flash floods were a recent phenomenon, which never occurred in his childhood. He begged
the villagers to go to the root of the problem and figure out why the flash floods were taking place
now. On his suggestion and after further discussions the villagers realised that the main reason
behind the flash floods were deforestation of the catchment forests.
Villagers then decided to enclose an area of 100 acres (40 ha) constituting the catchment of the
stream. Grazing, fuelwood collection, and other extractions were strictly banned in this patch. This
protected area was fenced by a barbed wised purchased by the villagers by pooling in resources.
In addition, the state government employed forest guards were barred from entering the protected
forest. They believed that dishonest forest guards will facilitate the entry of timber smugglers into
this forest.
The 60, households in the village decided to contribute, Rs. 30 per month to pay two local boys,
appointed as forest guards by the village.

Impacts of community conservation

As a result of a decade of strict protection, the forest regenerated fast. The thick Pine and
Cedar forest supports a luxuriant undergrowth of various shrubs and herbs. Wild animals, such as,
leopards, Himalayan black bear, jackals and foxes are now sighted frequently by the villagers. In
fact, the leopard population has increased so much that the villagers do not any longer take cattle
case studies - jammu and kashmir

for grazing into the protected forest. The protected forest of Garoor is also now inhabited by a large
number of birds.
The flash floods have stopped and the crop production has increased many-fold.

Opportunities and constraints

The protection effort seems to have impacted the women who depended on these forests for
collection of fuelwood. How did they manage and where did the pressure of this effort get diverted
is not clear from the available information.
On the other hand villagers feel that despite their best efforts at conservation, the state
government and the forest department has not given it the deserved attention. Although they also
agree that the indifference of the department has helped them organise themselves better and
mobilise the required resources locally. This has also helped strengthen the sense of belonging
towards the forests among the villagers. Today the villagers are very adamant that they do not
want to hand over their protected forest to the government.
279
280 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Conclusions
Lalla Lone, who was responsible for initiating the idea of protection of forests in the village
claims proudly today “God helps those who help themselves”. After seeing the lush green forests
inhabiting many kinds of flora and fauna and high agricultural yields of the village, one can’t agree
with him more.

Information for this case study has been taken from: ‘Villagers restore paradise in part’,
Financial Express, 17th September 2000. As printed in CSE-India Green File 2000.
Karnataka
Community conservation systems in parts of
Karnataka
Yogesh Gokhale and M.D. Subash Chandran

Editor’s note: The information below pertains mainly to Uttara Kannada, Shimoga, Dakshina Kannada, Udupi,
Chikmagalur and Kodagu districts of Karnataka, although inferences have been drawn from other districts wherever
information could be procured. Additionally, much of the focus is on forests and to a more limited extent on freshwater
wetlands, with little information on coastal and marine areas or other non-forested ecosystems. These biases indicate
only lapses in recording and reporting for want of time and resources, and are not intended to imply that there are
no community conservation initiatives in other districts of the state, or in non-forested ecosystems.

1. Background
1.1. Geographic profile
Karnataka state is situated
between 11o 40’ and 18o 27’
north latitudes and 74o 5’ and 78o
33’ east longitudes. It occupies
an area of 1,91,791 sq km,
with a forest area of 38,724 sq
km.1 Abundant rainfall (ranging
from 2000 to 6000 mm a year)
has promoted the growth of
luxuriant tropical forests in
Karnataka, which despite heavy
pressures still cover almost 17
per cent of the state. Evergreen
to semi-evergreen forests form
natural climax vegetation in the
western parts of the state, while
deciduous forests as natural
climax are observed merging
with the drier forests of the
Feeding mahaseer fish at the sacred stretch of river Shishila, in Shringeri
Deccan Plateau in the east. The Photo: Vivek Gour Broome
evergreen forests are richer in
species, having 30–50 species
of trees per hectare. The deciduous forests have been important sources of teak, rosewood and
several other timbers.
A complex landscape of species-rich climax forests, secondary forests, pastures, fields and
fallows, with corridors of rivers, streams, gorges and ridges, as also a long coastline and marine
stretch, are responsible for the rich wildlife that has existed in the state.
state chapter - karnataka

Physiographically, Karnataka forms part of two well defined macro-regions of India: the Deccan
Plateau and the coastal plains and islands2. The state has four physiographic regions:
Northern Karnataka Plateau: This comprises the districts of Belgaum, Bidar, Bijapur and
Gulbarga, and is largely composed of the Deccan Trap. It represents a monotonous, largely treeless
extensive plateau landscape with a general elevation of 300–600 metres above mean sea level.
This region is largely covered with rich black cotton soils.
Central Karnataka Plateau: This covers the districts of Bellary, Chikmagalur, Chitradurga,
Dharwad, Raichur and Shimoga. The region represents the transitional surface between the
Northern Karnataka Plateau of Deccan Trap and the Southern Karnataka Plateau with relatively
higher surface. By and large, this region represents the area of the Tungabhadra basin. The
general elevation varies between 450–700 metres.
283
284 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Southern Karnataka Plateau: This covers the districts of Bangalore, Bangalore Rural, Hassan,
Kodagu, Kolar, Mandya, Mysore and Tumkur. This region largely covers the area of the Cauvery
river basin lying in Karnataka. It is bounded by 600 metres contour and is characterised by a
higher degree of slope. In the west and south, it is enclosed by the ranges of Western Ghats and
the northern part is an interrupted but clearly identifiable high plateau. The general elevation of
the region varies from 600–900 metres.
Karnataka Coastal Region: This region extends between the Western Ghats, the edge of the
Karnataka Plateau in the east and the Arabian Sea in the west, covering Dakshina Kannada and
Uttara Kannada districts. The coastal region consists of two broad physical units, the plains and the
Western Ghats. The coastal plains represent a narrow stretch of estuarine and marine plains. The
abrupt rise at the eastern flanks forms the Western Ghats. The northern parts of the Ghats are of
lower elevation (450–600 metres) as compared to the southern parts (900 to 1,500 metres). The
Ghats have a difficult terrain full of rivers, creeks, waterfalls, peaks and hill ranges. The coastal
belt with an average width of 50–80 km covers a distance of about 267 km from north to south.

1.2. Socio-economic profile

Across most of Karnataka’s Western Ghats, which are not favourable for sheep and where cattle
are of poor breed, many communities have had traditional associations with hunting and fishing for
subsistence. Pre-colonial Uttara Kannada, for instance, was a haven for wildlife.
With a population of 52.85 million,3 Karnataka is predominantly rural and agrarian. About 66
per cent of its population lives in rural areas, while about 60 per cent of its workforce is engaged
in agricultural and allied activities.4 The districts in the Western Ghats have been renowned since
ancient times for spice gardens in which betelnut, pepper, cardamom, ginger and banana are grown.
Rice, coconut, sugarcane, groundnut, vegetables, mango, cashewnut, tuber crops, ginger, etc. are
other important crops. Karnataka accounts for 59 per cent of the country’s coffee production and
47 per cent of its ragi production.
Karnataka has a diverse tribal population, comprising about 6.6 per cent of the total population
of the state.5
The state has a coastline of about 320 km,6 providing one of the best fisheries along the west
coast. Tides that enter the estuaries flood a good part of the coast. The estuaries are highly
productive, but of late, enormous human pressures and interference with the natural ecology have
reduced their productivity drastically. Agricultural systems7 practiced in the shallow portions of
these estuaries date back hundreds of centuries. About 12,000 ha area of the state is under such
cultivation.
The state is rich in mineral resources, especially granite, along with gold and high-grade iron.8

2. Administrative control of land and resources

2. 1. A brief history9
The present state of Karnataka has inherited systems of land and tenure from four
different erstwhile administrative units: Bombay Presidency,
Madras Presidency, Mysore Princely State and Kodagu Princely
State.
In 1805, the British colonial government for the first time laid claim
to the indigenous forests of the western coast (which was part of
Bombay Presidency). Denuded coastal hills were set aside as minor
forests to meet the biomass needs of villages and more intact forests
were reserved for state use.10
Cleghorn11 writes ‘... from this period up to 1822 a partial and
somewhat ill-advised attempt at conservancy was made, but it
thoroughly failed in its object; and all the restrictions which had
been imposed during its existence were removed. This relaxation, or
rather abandonment of law, however, in course of time led to results of still more
disastrous nature, which threatened the speedy and complete destruction of the
forests themselves.’
Wanting to free itself from the unprofitable task of policing treeless tracts, the
forest department of the Bombay Presidency recommended the transfer of minor
 Karnataka 285

forests to the revenue department in the early 20th century. A survey of

coastal villages revealed, however, the existence of many patches of good tree
growth under village protection. To prevent their destruction under the revenue
department’s management and based on the recommendation of the Forest
Settlement Officer, in 1922 the Government of Bombay constituted the village
forest panchayats (village forest councils) to be entrusted with the conservation
of such forests.
Until almost the end of the 19th century, slash-and-burn agricultural areas and
their fallows dominated by secondary deciduous forests were predominant in the
low and medium elevations of the Western Ghats. The accumulation of combustible
materials in these secondary forests during the dry months made them highly susceptible to fires.
During the dry months, fires raged through the dry forest, but, ‘… no fires enter the evergreen
forest, leaves, branches and fallen trees accumulate and gradually decay, forming ultimately a rich
surface layer of vegetable mould.’12
Most of the Western Ghats, blessed with high annual rainfall, would historically have had
evergreen to semi-evergreen forests. After the fires set by shifting cultivators, the fallows were
enriched with timber trees such as teak, rosewood, heddi, matti, and nandi, as well as different
species of bamboo.
These secondary forests also had many other species which strengthened the livelihood of
people, such as myrobalan, canes, bamboos, wild date palm and soapnut. The myrobalans were in
high demand for tanning and dyeing purposes and were even exported. The kunbi women of Supa
made mats with phoenix leaves, which were in great demand. The kumri marattas of the Ankola
forests were experts in making cane baskets, also commanding a good market. The fallows also
abounded in grass and bamboo, which supported a wide variety of wildlife.
British foresters, arguing that shifting cultivators destroyed precious timber, brought restrictions
on shifting cultivation. By the close of the 19th century, the practice was almost banned. Ironically,
this minimised the fire factor, causing timber-rich secondary deciduous stands to gradually turn
evergreen, reducing their timber value, much to the consternation of the British foresters. This
prompted a saga in forestry involving clearing of natural forests to raise teak plantations, creating
ecological impoverishment, drying of watersheds, and hardships to locals who depended heavily
on biodiversity.
The Second World War saw the exploitation of the state’s forests as sources of timber. Logging
was intensified to meet requirements of railways, defence, public works and commercial sectors.
The British East India Company’s relentless exploitation of marine timbers like teak, poon and angeli
caused considerable depletion of the state’s coastal forests by the middle of the 19th century. The
forest department was better organized by the 1870s, and attempts were made to harvest timber
more systematically. Forest Working Plans began to make their appearance by the end of the 19th
century. Though the plans claimed to be scientific, they were not founded on experiences from
humid tropical forests.
The success of agriculture in Uttara Kannada depended heavily on substantial additions of leaf
manure, more so in the betelnut-cum-spice gardens. Local communities also depended heavily
on forests to meet firewood demands and on savannah lands for fodder. To meet the biomass
needs of the local people the colonial government set aside degraded areas as minor forests.
Although the government, in theory, did assign such minor forests for villages in Uttara Kannada,
it was virtually impossible for the residents of one village to safeguard their minor forests from
the pressures from nearby villages. Nor could they stop their own members from over-harvesting,
leading to a tragedy of the opens due to the lack of an effective institutional structure other than
the forest department itself.
state chapter - karnataka

In other parts of Karnataka, such as Dakshina Kannada district, Bellary and Udupi district, which
were part of Madras Presidency , there was serious over-exploitation of timber, especially for the
railways (for details, see the chapter on Tamil Nadu in this volume, in particular the description of
forestry in the Madras Presidency).
Since Independence, the Government has granted heavy favours to forest-based industries
while overlooking the needs of local communities. Even sacred forests were exploited for timber.
Bamboo, widely acknowledged as the ‘poor man’s timber’, was depleted through over-harvesting.
Trees of subsistence importance to the locals such as mango, Artocarpus, Myristica, etc., and even
rarer species were felled. Additionally, between 1947 and 1985, 12 per cent of Uttara Kannada’s
forests were released for various non-forestry purposes.
Village Forests (VFs) under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, were set up in the 1930s in several
286 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

villages in Uttara Kannada and Shimoga districts, although the basis on which these villages were
chosen remains unclear. Subsequently, this arrangement was incorporated into the 1963 Karnataka
Forest Act. Surprisingly though, already existing VFs were all de-recognised. Three village forest
panchayats in Uttara Kannada contested this order in the High Court, and were granted permission
to continue, which they do (for more details see Section 3.2).

2.2. Current forest tenure regimes in Karnataka13

Official records indicate that currently there are five legal categories of forests in Karnataka:
reserved forests, protected forests, unclassed forests, village forests and private forests14 (see
table below).

Table 1: Legal Categories of Forest in Karnataka15

Type Extent (sq km)

a. Reserve forest 28,689.96
b. Protected forests 3,930.72
c. Village forests 124.20
d. Unclassified forests 5,231.00
e. Private forests 308.42
.. Total 38,284.30

On the ground, the situation is much more complex, with local people referring to a number of
other categories as well, such as soppinabettas, kumkis, etc. These various categories of forests
include situations where most legal and administrative control lies with the government, forests
with joint rights and responsibilities, community-controlled and -managed forests, and privately
controlled forests. This complexity is believed to have arisen from the fact that Karnataka has
inherited systems of land and tenure from the four erstwhile administrative units mentioned in
Section 2.1. Any information clarifying the exact legal status of the various categories of forests
seems to be absent. Shrinidhi and Lele16 group this array of legal and administrative categories
into five broad tenure regimes: largely state controlled, largely open-access, largely community
controlled, largely privately controlled, and mixed regimes with equal role for the village community
and the state.
State-controlled forests include national parks (NP), wildlife sanctuaries (WLS), reserved
forests (RF), and Amrut Mahal Kaval. Of these regimes NPs are the strictest, in that people’s
rights—and all human activities, except tourism—are prohibited. WLS permit some activities, such
as extraction of NTFP, fuelwood and fodder, at the discretion of the FD officials. Amrut Mahal
Kaval are inherited from the erstwhile Mysore State, where forests-cum-grasslands were set aside
to meet the fodder requirements of the royal cattle. In present times these Kaval lands act as a
source of fodder to the local communities. Together these three regimes add up to 47 per cent
of the total forests in the state. It is interesting to note that, while the forest-use activities of
the local communities are severely restricted, several other activities such as mining, quarrying,
etc. are allowed under the Karnataka Forest Act and Rules. Amongst the most blatant misuse
of state powers was the continuation, till a court order stopped it, of mining in the ecologically
sensitive Kudremukh National Park. Till 1983, when logging of green trees was banned, excessive
extraction of timber had ecologically depleted most of the government-controlled forests in
Karnataka. Bamboo stocks have been severely depleted because of unregulated extraction by
private companies. Recently orders were issued permitting extraction of dead and fallen logs from
inside NPs and WLSs.17 In addition, denotification of WLSs and NPs under pressure from different
lobbies has also occasionally taken place.
Largely open-access regimes include protected forests (except in Uttara Kannada); district
forests (a term used only in the Karnataka Forest Act 1963), minor forests of Uttara Kannada,
paisaris of Kodagu and gomaals of Shimoga and Chikmagalur (the latter two being largely pasture
lands but often with thick forest cover), and the Assessed Wastelands of Dakshina Kannada. These
add up to 37 per cent of the total forest lands in the state. These areas have been set aside with the
objective of meeting the subsistence requirements of the local people, such as fodder, fuelwood,
leaf manure, etc. No efforts were made to work towards regulated use through establishment
of local institutions. The situation of liberal rights and lack of assigned responsibility resulted in
 Karnataka 287

these areas becoming open-access forests. Emergence of people’s own institutions was probably
discouraged by the fact that rules regarding these areas were still made by the state, without any
consultation with the local users. Access given to villagers could be withdrawn at any time. Lands
may even have been transferred from one agency to another without consulting or even informing
the villagers. For example, pasturelands are often transferred from the revenue department to the
forest department for plantation under social forestry without considering the grazing requirements
of the locals; and Assessed Wastelands are leased out to private companies for resource extraction.
Thus even though these regimes were established with the intention of meeting local people’s
needs, the community-use tenures remained highly insecure. The demarcation of these regimes
on the ground or even in government records is very poor, often not even reflecting transfers from
one regime to another.
Largely community-controlled and mixed-control regimes include devarakadus, uruduve,
panchayati mandu and devara mandu of Kodagu, village forests of Chikmagalur, Shimoga and
Uttara Kannada, social forestry plantations, and Joint Forest Planning and Management. The latter
two have much more government control than the others, and exist on lands with differing legal
regimes, such as RF (reserved forests), PF (protected forests) and MF (minor forests). Village
Forests are the only community forest tenure recognised by law under Indian Forest Act 1927.
They enabled the formation of village forest panchayats (which were later merged with village
panchayats) to manage forest use sustainably, resolve conflicts, share benefits equitably, and
protect forests from outsiders. They permit regulated extraction of resources, regulated removal
of timber (except sandalwood, rosewood and teak) and quarrying of laterite bricks. All villagers are
by default members of the village panchayat.
Administratively, both VFs and open-access regimes are under the dual control of the forest
department and the revenue department. Shrinidhi and Lele18 state that ‘since VFs are fully
recognised under and notified as per the Act, they are generally clearly demarcated in the records;
in fact, the de-recognition of most of the VFs in 1960s has not prevented the FD from continuously
reporting them as VFs till date.’
Largely privately controlled forests include soppinabettas of Uttara Kannada; soppinabettas,
haadyas, and khaate-kaans (historically) of Shimoga and Chikmagalur; kumkis, kaanebaanes,
haadis and private forests of Dakshina Kannada; and two different baanes in Kodagu. These
add up to about 16 per cent of the total forested area in the region. These seem to have been
constituted to provide an assured source of biomass to the farmers to maintain productivity of
agriculture and livestock, while also meeting their fuelwood and timber needs. They all confer
exclusive access to individual households on the basis of their ownership of a particular piece of
private agricultural land.19

3. Towards community conservation initiatives

Conservation amongst indigenous and traditional communities is built on knowledge based
on a long series of observations of the behaviour of complex ecological systems, accumulated
and transmitted through generations. Where people have depended on their environment for
sustenance over long periods of time, they have developed a stake in conserving, and in some
cases enhancing, local biodiversity. They are aware that biological diversity is a crucial factor in
generating the ecological services on which they depend.
Conservation calls for restraint in resource exploitation. Arriving at an appropriate set of restraints
for a bewildering array of resource-use systems and implementing them is not a simple matter of
transmitting information. Rather, implementation seems to be based on a complex set of ‘rules
of thumb’ arrived at through accumulated historical experience. Compliance is
often facilitated through religious belief, ritual and social conventions,20 many
state chapter - karnataka

of which have been closely associated with the worship of nature and natural
objects such as mountains, cliffs, forests, rivers, lakes, caves and waterfalls.
Individual species of plants and animals were granted totemic importance.21
Such conservation is obviously based on the accumulated knowledge
through generations on the uses of biodiversity. Intentional conservation of
forests by communities may not be older than the introduction of agriculture
in the Western Ghats about three millennia ago.22
Karnataka had a strong tradition of community conservation,23 especially in
its forests, until the British domination that began about two centuries ago
(see Section 2 and Section 4.1). The following sections explore community
conservation systems, including the continuation of religious traditions as in
288 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

the case of Kodagu, more recent community efforts such as village forest panchayats, traditional
conservation such as protection of village heronries, and so on.

3.1. Sacred groves

3.1.1. Kinds and extent of sacred groves
The most notable community conserved areas of the Western Ghats are its sacred groves (SGs).
The sacred groves, wherever they existed, belonged originally to traditional societies, and were
considered as links in a web of spiritual relationships with their biophysical environment. In time,
these groves became isolated patches of the original forest in a landscape mosaic of villages,
cleared fields, and secondary forest at various stages of growth.24
Referring to patches of forest spared by the shifting cultivators of Travancore, Bourdillon wrote
in 1893:25 ‘Many pieces of forests are seen on the hills left untouched when the surrounding land
has been cleared ... because they are supposed to be each inhabited by some spirit.’
Brandis26 the first Inspector General of Forests of India, impressed by the system of sacred
groves, made special mention of the devarakadus of Kodagu. The Imperial Gazetteer of India,
1908, describes these devarakadus as ‘untrodden by human foot and reserved for the abodes or
hunting grounds of deified ancestors.’
SGs vary in terms of size, ownership patterns and also with respect to the vegetation. These
factors are influenced by the biogeography of the species harboured and the human influence on
SGs. The groves broadly come under two classes:
Smaller groves: These are entirely protected; no tree felling or other biomass extraction may be
carried out. They are generally referred to as devarbana or nagabana27 (serpent groves). These SGs
are ubiquitous features of the landscape in Uttara Kannada, Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts.
The size usually ranges from a few gunthas (40 gunthas = 1 acre) to a few acres in rare cases.
In Uttara Kannada the deities in SGs are mainly Bhutappa, Jatakappa, Mariamma, Chowdamma,
Hulidevaru and occassionally Naga. The majority of SGs are owned by the forest department and
managed by the local people. Siddapur taluka of Uttara Kannada district is illustrative. It has
about 100 SGs. The whole district could be viewed as a single integrated unit, with interdependent
areca nut cultivation, reserved forests, soppinabettas, paddy fields, bena (pasture) lands, minor
forests and SGs. If the Siddapur case study data can be extrapolated for the entire Uttara Kannada
district (comprising 11 talukas totally covering 10,291 sq km), this would suggest the existence
of more than 1000 SGs in the district. Some of the rare ecosystems like the Myristica swamps are
often found as SGs in Uttara Kannada district. In many cases the present-day smaller SGs amidst
soppinabetta lands represent the smaller fragments of earlier larger devarkans.
Nagabanas are abundant in Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts. They are small in size, ranging
from a few gunthas to a few acres on rare occasions. The nagabanas are mainly owned by families
and are occasionally linked with the temple complexes in the districts. A study conducted by the
Nagarik Seva Trust recorded more than 700 nagabanas in the Belthangady taluk of Dakshina
Kannada district.28 Another inventory of nagabanas conducted by the Centre for Ecological Sciences,
Indian Institute of Science, in a 50 sq km area surrounding village Mala in Karkala taluk of Dakshina
Kannada, reported more than 300 nagabanas. It is clear that the number of nagabanas is very high
in these two districts.
Larger groves: The large groves would vary in size from a few acres up to many hectares.
These groves also function as resource forest, offering both sustenance and ecological security.
The people of the village may gather fallen deadwood, extract non-wood produce such as pepper,
mango and jackfruit, and tap toddy from the fishtail palm. They also tend wild pepper within the
kans.29 The SGs are referred to by names such as devarakadu, devarkan, etc. These SGs are
mainly reported from Uttara Kannada, Shimoga and Kodagu districts.
Devarkans used to be an important part of the landscape in Uttara Kannada, Shimoga and
Chikmagalur districts till about 150 years ago. Referring to such sacred kans, Wingate, the Forest
Settlement Officer of Uttara Kannada, noted that the kans were of ‘great economic and climatic
importance. They favour the existence of springs, and perennial streams and generally indicate the
proximity of valuable spice gardens, which derive from them both shade and moisture.’30 The forest
management by the British regime in these districts altered the land-use pattern substantially,
by either discontinuing the traditional practices or neglecting them for revenue and timber. This
made the devarkans as historical sacred forests. Uttara Kannada was part of the erstwhile Bombay
Presidency, where the British regime abolished the rights of local people over the devarkans.
 Karnataka 289

Buchanan (1870) observed that wild pepper requires human attention for better yield. He found
people taking care of pepper vines in evergreen forest patches called maynasu canu, meaning
menasu kan or pepper kan. Such kans were intermixed with gardens and rice fields. High demand
for pepper could have been a good incentive for village societies to maintain kans.
Old records of Village Forest Registers suggest that Sirsi taluka had 106 devarkans, while Siddapur
taluka had 116. It is quite likely that there could be about 1000 devarkans in Uttara Kannada
district. It is quite necessary to identify the overlap between smaller SGs and the devarkans. All
the kan survey numbers are mainly under reserved forest status.31
At the time of surveys by Brandis and Grant,32 Sorab taluka had 171 kans totalling an area of
14,850 ha. In other words about 10 per cent of the land area of Sorab was covered with these
community reserves. Cowlidurg taluka (Tirthahalli) had 436 kans and Kadur district (Chikmagalur)
had 128.
Shimoga and Chikmagalur districts were part of the erstwhile princely state of Mysore. Kan
lands were recognised by the State forest department till almost 1970. But after that those survey
numbers were merged in reserved forests and other kinds of forests including minor forests, State
Forests and district forests. But even today Sagar division in Shimoga circle has 314 kan survey
numbers on official record, which need to be cross-checked in the field for the status of forest.33
These sacred forests have clearly demarcated boundaries and many village communities continue
to spare time to mark their boundaries—at the very least the portion that houses the village
deities.
The sacred groves of hundreds of villages are likely to have once formed an excellent network
for conservation of biodiversity. They also protected watersheds, enhanced habitat heterogeneity,
moderated local climate and supplied various non-timber forest produce to local communities.
Produce of subsistence value from the kans included the main tradable produce of pepper and
cinnamon, and several fruits such as mango, Artocarpus spp. and Garcinia spp., various edible
seeds, medicinal plants, toddy and sugar from the palm Caryota urens. Rattan canes and reeds
like Ochlandra were collected for basket weaving.
The Government of Bombay (1923) highlighted the watershed value of the kans: ‘Throughout
the area, both in Sirsi and Siddapur, there are few tanks and few deep wells and the people
depend much on springs ... Heavy evergreen forests hold up several feet of monsoon rain ... if an
evergreen forest [referring to kans] is felled in the dry season, the flow of water from any spring it
feeds increases rapidly though no rain water may have fallen for some months ...’
These evergreen forests, protected for centuries against the slash and burn of shifting cultivation,
have acted as refugia for scores of fire-sensitive species, most of which are endemic to the Western
Ghats. Mention may be made of plants such as Dipterocarpus indicus, Vateria indica, Pinanga
dicksoni and Myristica fatua, which today survive only in
some kans of Uttara Kannada. Chandran et al.34 report
51 Myristica swamps in Uttara Kannada district. Of these,
nine have a history of protection within sacred groves.
Kodagu district could be called the hotspot of sacred
grove traditions in India, perhaps even worldwide, as it
has the largest number of sacred groves in proportion
to the area in the world. All 18 native communities are
stakeholders in this unique tradition. There are 1214
listed sacred groves in Kodagu, covering an area of 2550
hectares. These devarakadus are owned by the forest
department and managed by the community with the
state chapter - karnataka

help of devarakadu committees. Apart from that, SGs

are also associated with the matta (monasteries) and in
private ownership with the families. Every village has at
least one sacred grove and there are 39 villages having
more than seven groves each. These groves have been
protected in the names of 65 deities, of which Iyappa,
Bhagavathi, Bhadrakali and Mahadeva are common.
Though the district has a large number of sacred groves,
nearly 45 per cent of the groves are less than one acre
in extent and 80 per cent of the groves are less than
five acres. Hence the sacred groves in Kodagu are small
islands, surrounded by other landscapes like coffee Dodda Sampige sacred grove, Biligiri
Rangaswamy Temple Wildlife Sanctuary
estates, paddy fields, reserve forests and habitations. Photo: Sujatha Padmanabhan
290 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

In Kodagu, the first inventory of SGs was done in 1873, when 873 groves covering an area of
4398 hectares were listed. The area increased to 6277 hectares during the year 1905 and during
the last inventory, undertaken in 1985, there were 1214 groves covering an area of 2550 hectares.
Hence in the last 80 years, 42 per cent of the area under sacred groves was lost and the groves
got fragmented resulting in an increase in their number.35

3.1.2. Institutional structures in the conservation of sacred groves

The local community almost always assumed responsibility for protection of the sacred groves
and the enforcement of rules and taboos that governed them. In Uttara Kannada district the grove
was an integral part of village life, and the entire community participated in decision making that
affected its management. In fact, though the state owned the kans, local committees fined the
offenders. Francis Buchanan, a British traveller writing on the kans of Uttara Kannada remarked
in 1801: ‘… Trees ought not to be cut without having leave from the Gauda or headman36 of the
village … The idol receives nothing for granting this permission; but the neglect of the ceremony
of asking his leave brings his vengeance on the guilty person.’
Communities like the divars (namdharis), karivokkaligas and madivals traditionally carried out
rites and rituals in the kans of Uttara Kannada and Shimoga districts. Since the divars, the main
keepers of the kans of Siddapur, Sirsi and Sorab talukas, are intricately linked to the kans, they
are known locally as kan divars. In Kodagu, the devarakadus are managed by a temple committee,
represented largely by the dominant kodava community. The non-kodavas are also involved in
the decision-making but to a much lesser degree. The members of the committee overlap with
those of the village panchayats; hence VPs often have a say in the matters. The devarakadus
were transferred back to the FD in 1985. Since then they have been classified as reserved forests
(under a special category, where the management lies largely with the local community although
the ownership is with the government).
Tropical forest ecologist, Peter Ashton37 (1988), impressed by the kans of Sorab, described
them as ‘… prototypes of a technique currently being promoted as a new approach to forestry:
agroforestry. In a region dominated by deciduous forests that were annually burned [Sorab borders
with the more humid Uttara Kannada towards its west, and the drier Deccan towards the east], the
kans stood out as belts, often miles long, of evergreen forest along the moist scarps of Western
Ghat hills. Assiduously protected by the villagers, these once natural forests had been enriched
by the inhabitants through interplanting of such useful crop species as jackfruits, sago and sugar
palms, pepper vine, and even coffee, an exotic.’
The extraction of NTFP from the village kans was not an open-access affair. Brandis and Grant38
reported resident villagers paying taxes or warg to the state for the privilege of collection of non-
timber forest produce such as pepper and toddy from palms. Each privilege holder, or wargdar,
operated a specific part of the kan without infringing another’s area. Such warg systems existed
almost till the close of the 19th century.39
Specific rules that govern sacred groves are peculiar to each grove, but some common
mechanisms include (i) restricting entry to individuals outside the community, (ii) restricting
resource extraction, by banning felling, permitting only dried leaves/fuel wood to be extracted or
by defining specific periods during which extraction is permitted, and (iii) the imposition of fines
on offending individuals.

3.1.3. Constraints for conservation of sacred groves

Following the Indian Forest Act of 1878, kans became
reserved forests of the state. The surrender of sacred
forests to the state eroded their unique identities.
That the colonial government did not recognise kans
as areas of community importance is reflected by
Buchanan,40 who considered local claims of forest
sanctity as a ‘contrivance’ to prevent the state from
taking over such forests.
The Government of Bombay (1923)41 had indeed given
special protection to the kans of Uttara Kannada, mainly
because of their watershed value, though they did not recognise
local people’s access and customary use over them. While the
kans were under the control of local communities, various rights such
 Karnataka 291

as the right to tend to wild pepper, to tap toddy and to gather other non-timber forest produce
were shared by the village communities, possibly on payment of a cess or warg to the rulers.
This traditional system was discontinued by the British, who introduced the contract system for
collection of NTFP from the kans, following the Indian Forest Act of 1878. The impact may be
described in the words of Wingate (1888), the Forest Settlement Officer for Uttara Kannada: ‘I
am still of the opinion that the system of annually selling by auction the produce of the kans is a
pernicious one. The contractor sends forth his subordinates and coolies, who hack about the kans
just as they please, the pepper vines are cut down from the root, dragged from the trees and the
fruits then gathered, while the cinnamon trees are all but destroyed ... I was greatly struck by the
general destruction among the Kumta evergreens, they were in a far finer state of preservation
15 years ago.’
Following the state’s takeover of the groves, some were included as part of the minor forests,
some were added to betta or leaf-manure forests, and most were subjected to selection-felling
and even clear-felling for raising monoculture plantations. In fact the decline of the kans of Uttara
Kannada can be traced back to conversion of lands in their vicinity for raising betelnut-cum-spice
gardens. These gardens require a large quantity of leaf manure, which the Havik Brahmin gardeners
harvested even from the kans. Some of the Havik Brahmin gardeners, at the time of Buchanan’s
visit to Uttara Kannada in 1801, had claimed that all the spontaneously pepper-producing forests,
obviously referring to the evergreen kans, belonged to them.
Under state control, destructive harvesting methods of the contractor replaced the care given
to pepper and cinnamon by local communities in the kans. Subsistence hunting gave way to
sport.42 In eastern Sirsi, 769 ha of kans were added to the state’s minor forests and subsequently
subjected to unregulated exploitation.43,44 Collins (1922)45 pointed out that as a variation from its
policy of strict protection to the kans of Uttara Kannada, the government allotted the kans in many
villages of Sirsi and Siddapur talukas to the spice gardeners as betta or leaf-manure forests.
To meet demands for fuelwood and other biomass needs of the local population, the colonial
government permitted the gathering of dry fuel wood from the kans. The kans were therefore,
no more the ‘property of the Gods’. By 1922 the kans of eastern Sirsi and Siddapur were already
infested with the prolific weed Lantana camara,46 from which we may presume that the canopies
of the kans forests had been rapidly depleted.
Resource shortages faced by local communities after the forest reservations resulted in widespread
tree felling within the kans of Shimoga as well. Forest Working Plans for Sirsi and Siddapur included
73 kans totalling an area of over 4000 ha for extraction of ‘over mature trees’.47 Another Working
Plan, for firewood extraction for Sirsi town, included the kans of 10 villages, totalling 672 ha.48
During the 1940s, Dipterocarpus indicus from some kans of southern Uttara Kannada was supplied
to the railways and a plywood company.49,50
Post-independence, industrial extraction of timber from what were once considered sacred
forests was widespread in Karnataka. In 1967, the Chief Conservator of Forests reported to the
Government of Karnataka that the non-extraction of over-mature trees from devarakadus of
Kodagu was a waste. On his recommendation the government ordered that the forest department
might carry out extraction of such trees from the devarakadus, and the revenue derived, after
deducting the working charges, be debited to the Endowment Department of the state for the
welfare of the temples. In 1967, the Chief Conservator of Forests (Gl) reported to Government that
migrant populations were destroying the devarakadus of Kodagu. In 1975, the government also
permitted a veneer company to extract timber from the devarakadus.51
In recent decades, with the increasing popularity of text-based Hinduism among forest folk,
temples have been constructed to house the gods of the groves. Such construction is often followed
by a neglect of the groves by the community. The awe with which the groves were once held has
state chapter - karnataka

been transferred to the temples, and violations are on the increase, in the form of tree cutting,
gathering of other biomass, agricultural expansion and housing.52
Encroachments of the kans for housing and agriculture have degraded the kans of
Shimoga and Uttara Kannada as well. In the post-independence period, kans
were even deforested to make way for human settlements—the Hittalkoppa
kan of Siddapur, for instance. The township of Sorab in Shimoga district
continues to expand into the Hiresekuni kan that was once spread over
120 ha.
292 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

3.2. Village forest panchayats and other forest conservation

In the traditional land use system of Uttara Kannada a typical village would have the following
elements in the landscape:53
• Sacred Forests: Locally called the kans or the devarakadus (see Section 3.1. for details).
• Utility Forests: Known as kadu or adavi, these were to meet the routine biomass needs of the
villagers, like timber, leaf manure, fuelwood, poles and stakes, etc. These were often secondary
in nature, particularly if fire was a common occurrence, but were evergreen if fire was not a
common occurrence.
• Bena, betta and kumri: Bena were pasturelands, beta were for collection of leaf, and kumri
were shifting cultivation sites, as well as regular fields and gardens.
Many traditions relating to restraints in resource use in pre-colonial Indian society exist even
today, which include (in addition to the sacred groves mentioned above) quantitative quotas of
biomass like fuelwood; closed seasons for hunting; protecting life history stages of various plants
and animals; protection of individual species; protection of habitats; etc. British officials observed
such systems of resource management in many parts of Karnataka. However, after the takeover
of the forests in the coastal areas, there was a demand from local people for access to fuelwood
and leaf manure. To satisfy this need, large parts of forests were declared protected forests or
minor forests. However, soon the FD realised that it was an uneconomic affair. In the words of the
then Chief Conservator of Forests: ‘The forest department is commercial and its position must be
criticised from a business point of view. Consequently this Department cannot look after forests
where people are to be allowed to satisfy their wants either free or at rates much below market
rates … This Department readily abandons these minor coastal forests.’54
Based on the above, a proposition was made to hand over the impoverished coastal forests
(which had become open-access forests after the takeover and hence degraded rapidly) to the
revenue department. However, G.F.S. Collins, the then Settlement Officer, observed that despite
the denudation, the coastal hills of Kumta and Honavar talukas had many isolated bits of forests
with good tree growth protected by villagers. In villages such as Manki, Gunawanti, Vanalli, Chitrigi,
Halkar and Holangadde, there were even village committees to look after these forests. To save such
forests on the recommendations of Collins (1922),55 the Bombay Government made a provision in
its forest policy for creation of village forest panchayats. Such panchayats or executives were to be
constituted by the elected representatives of the villagers. By 1930, in Kumta Forest Range nine
VFPs were formed covering 11 villages, and a total area of 1814 ha (See Case Studies).
However, as has been mentioned in Section 2.2, when Uttara Kannada’s reserved forests
were fast depleting in the 1970s, the state government permitted industrial logging in the well-
wooded village panchayat forests. The 100 ha Kallabbekan of Kumta, administered by the Muroor-
Kallabbe village forest panchayat, was leased out by the state government in 1976 to a plywood
company for extraction of timber. Despite protests from the people, the company extracted
several magnificent evergreen trees. The state government even promulgated an order asking
the village forest committee to surrender the forest to the forest
department. Although the High Court of Karnataka upheld the
community’s appeal against this order, the struggle of the fragile
village community to maintain its forests against increasing odds
did not last long. Years of litigation, non-cooperation from the
state and rising disunity among its own members resulted in the
collapse of the VFP system. Unity among the villagers no longer
exists and elections to the VFP have not been conducted. This is
a sad instance of the collapse of one of the finest VFPs of coastal
Uttara Kannada, where the local community managed a forest
covering about 1000 ha, of which 100 ha was the kan of a bygone
age.
The state government countered the protest by ordering all VFPs
of Uttara Kannada to surrender their forests to it. Seven of nine
VFPs concurred with the order. In Chitrigi village the surrender of
the forest resulted in total extermination of its tree growth. The
state’s insensitivity to community management surfaced again in
1991 when it unilaterally allotted 6.5 ha of Halkar VFP forest for
the passage of a railroad through it. The VFP failed to change the
course of the rail but just managed to get the cut trees for the
Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple Wildlife
Sanctuary, Karnataka people. The request seeking compensation for the lost land has
Photo: Sujatha Padmanabhan not been considered.
 Karnataka 293

Other than forests under VFPs, there are a number of community conserved forests. Murthy et
al. (2000)56 document that there are about 23 cases of community forest management in Sagar
taluka in Shimoga district of the Western Ghats of Karnataka. All these self-managed institutions
have evolved over more than 25 years. Three such sites, viz., Hunsur, Alalli and Kugwe in Sagar
taluk, were studied in detail, including the systems of local institutions of protection, extraction
and sharing of resources. Mechanisms of controlling over-grazing were documented. Hunsur and
Kugwe have a land record history of being kan survey numbers.

3.3. Species conservation

As in many other parts of the country,
communities in Karnataka have helped in
conservation of specific species such as mahaseer
fish and waterbirds, due to religious sentiments,
cultural and traditional associations or newly
developed relationships. A precise assessment of
the number of such examples is not available.
In villages such as Kaggaladu in Tumkur District
and Kokarebellur near Mysore, villagers extend
protection to painted storks, grey herons and
spotbilled pelicans, among other birds. The
zeal for protection is so high that they suffer
economic losses by not auctioning the tamarinds
or mangoes from the trees on which the birds Sacred fish in river Shishila at Shingeri
nest. Youth in these villages are actively involved Photo: Vivek Gour Broome
in nursing the injured birds and chicks. These
birds are considered harbingers of good fortune to the village, and in years that the birds fail to
turn up, villagers prepare themselves for natural calamities (See Case Studies). There are also
examples like Uluvebailu in Shringeri taluka, where a family initiated protection of many waterbirds
that came to roost on their trees after the construction of a dam in the vicinity. In the face of
threats and cost implications involved, the family countered poachers from outside and planted
trees for the birds to roost. In their efforts they also received the support of other villagers (See
Case Studies).
Karnataka, with vast riverine stretches of about 6000 km, boasts a rich and varied fish fauna
with about 200 species. Some of the riverine stretches near temples are considered abodes for
certain protected fish species and have traditionally been referred to as ‘sanctuaries’. Examples
include parts of the Cauvery near Ranganathittu and Ramanathapura temples; parts of the
river Kumaradhara near Shishila; and parts of the river Tunga near Shringeri, Jammatigi, and
Chippalagudda. The Ramanathapura fish sanctuary on the Cauvery in Arakalgudu taluka, Hassan
district, is also known as Vanhi Pushkarani. According to local legend, the fishes in the Vanhi
Pushkarani are incarnations of noble souls around Lord Shiva. It has been observed that the fishes
sheltering in the area never get displaced even when the river is flooded.
However, these community protected wetlands are under threat. Chandrashekaraiah et al.57
write: ‘A declining trend in fish species, population and size have been noticed over the past few
decades in the sanctuaries. The apparent reasons seem to be construction of barrages, weirs and
anicuts, etc. along these rivers, establishment of industries, housing, etc. In order to safeguard
these traditional sanctuaries some of them have been declared protected officially also. For example
Ramanathapura fish sanctuary was declared an official sanctuary in 1935 by the Government of
Mysore under Mysore Game and Fish Preservation Regulation of 1901. Ranganathittu and Shishila
were declared sanctuaries more recently under the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972.’
state chapter - karnataka

In many of the examples mentioned above, communities have often felt helpless in the face of
pressures from outside and have requested external intervention. NGOs and institutions such as
Mysore Amateur Naturalists (MAN), Wildlife Aware Nature Club, Centre for Ecological Sciences and
others have extended help. Often help has also come from government agencies.

3.4. State efforts towards community conservation58

After Independence the major focus of state forest management was to provide raw material
for industries as also manure requirements to the spice and betelnut farmers. This was to the
extent that even legally recognised tenures such as Village Forests were de-recognised to meet
industrial needs once the reserved forests were exhausted. However, as an apparent shift in
294 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

the policy (probably under the influence of the donor agencies or keeping in mind the level of
forest degradation), a social forestry programme was initiated in 1985. This programme envisaged
setting up of village-level committees to raise plantations in legally non-forest lands. According to
Shrinidhi and Lele (2001),59 though a large number of plantations were taken up, the committees
themselves never functioned in any meaningful manner for a variety of reasons.
In 1993, the Government of Karnataka initiated Joint Forest Planning and Management (JFPM).60
As of 2005, the state has 3887 JFPM Committees covering 0.32 million ha area (MoEF and WII
2005).61 Here again formation of committees was envisaged but this time it was to manage
degraded patches of legally forest lands. Under JFPM, the villagers are supposed to get access
to fuelwood, fodder and leafy matter in the managed patch, in return for protecting the forest.
The products are meant for self-consumption but excess could also be sold to the neighbouring
villages. The villagers are also supposed to get 50 per cent share in the net proceeds from the sale
of any timber planted and harvested in the managed patch. Villagers are, however, not allowed
any rights or responsibilities over the non-degraded forests being used by them. The Village Forest
Committee formed under the programme is open to all adult members of the village, while the
executive committee has reserved seats for disadvantaged groups. The secretary of the committee
is always the local Forester, which causes the relationship to be lopsided in favour of the FD. Often
women members or underprivileged sections represented in the committee are unaware of their
being members, or are reluctantly included to fulfil the requirements.62

The JFPM programme has been criticised as having a number of flaws:

• VFCs have some operational flexibility provided they prepare, and get the FD to approve, a
management plan. However, villagers find extremely difficult to make plans in the absence of
any guidelines.
• The constitution of the VFC or agreements with the VFC do not have any legal standing; thus
their de-recognition by the FD cannot be challenged in a court of law.
• While the FD has a complete say in the decision-making process of the VFC, villagers have no say
in larger decisions related to JFPM or forests.
• JFPM gives inadequate attention to the forests outside of the land that is legally forest.
• No cognisance is taken of existing individual rights and about giving full and clear rights over
NTFPs to villagers.
• Instead of making JFPM a forest management policy and introducing it to the entire state, it
remains a programme linked to the availability of special donor funds. Thus because of the
limited funds, JFPM remains restricted to Uttara Kannada, Chikmagalur and Shimoga districts,
managing 20–100 ha of minor forests, district forests and reserved forest lands.
It has been suggested that kans be included in the JFPM programme. Kans have traditionally
been important for the local people, and continue to earn high revenues for the state government.
Inclusion of kans in the JFPM would thus be an ideal situation (for more details, see case
studies).

4. The way ahead

Studies in Uttara Kannada, Shimoga and Kodagu have shown that local-level ecosystem
management systems were far more holistic and sustainable than modern utilitarian systems. Pre-
colonial indigenous forest management systems were destroyed without the introduction of viable
alternatives.
In Kodagu, devarakadu committees and the forest department have
taken a very positive step to recognize sacred groves as one of the
kinds of forest owned by the state forest department and managed by
devarakadu committees. A federation of devarakadu committees has
been formed at taluka and district level. The academic institutions
like Forestry College, Ponnampet, collect the information and provide
technical support. NGOs play a catalytic function in the overall
process. The forest department has respected the local sentiments that
emerged in a huge sacred grove festival at Virajpet in October 2000.
This is probably the only such initiative in the country where this kind
of concrete action has been initiated regarding sacred groves.
 Karnataka 295

The model of Kodagu can be adapted for other parts of the state, especially in other districts
of the Western Ghats as discussed earlier. The large number of groves certainly guarantees the
faith of people in this tradition. But a lot needs to be done to convey the biological and ecological
importance of this tradition to the common person, as temples are coming up inside the sacred
groves at the cost of the vegetation.
Chandran and Gadgil (1993)63 reconstructed the pre-colonial profile of a traditional land-use
system prevailing in a 25 sq km area in eastern Siddapur, Uttara Kannada district, based on
documented history, folk history and landscape features. The landscape was a mosaic of diverse
elements: well-protected kans or sacred groves-cum-safety forests occupied 6 per cent of the area;
supply forests (kadu or adavi) which met the community’s resource needs accounted for 24 per
cent; shifting cultivation areas and their fallows (collectively known as hakkal lands) covered 23
per cent of the area; and bena or pastures accounted for 7 per cent, while fields and spice gardens
constituted the remainder. Some semblance of this could be recreated with proper planning and
participation.
A case study of Siddapur taluka in Uttara Kannada district shows that even today 1906.66 ha
area is under kan forest (see table below). The biological importance as well as the historic linkage
of kan tradition has been discussed earlier. Siddapur Forest Range case study also shows that
there is lot of potential available to protect and nurture.

Table 2: Kan forest in Siddapur taluka, Uttara Kannada district

Kan
Kan Kan area
area still Percentage No. of Range area
Range original percentage in
available available kans (ha)
area (ha) Range area
(ha)
Siddapur 1450.62 963.47 66.42 83 67542.8 1.43
Kyadagi 970.12 943.19 97.22 29 20880.8 4.52

Total area 2420.74 1906.66 78.76 112 88423.6 2.16

Source: Gokhale, Y. 2002 unpublished

Considering the close relationship of people and forest resources in kans, there could be
possibilities of restoring institutional responsibilities, such as in the matrix below:

Ways → Decentralised Joint Local level Open

Tasks performers performers performers bidding
performers
NTFP
VFC
collection
Controlled
VFC, FD
harvest
Quality
VFC
control

Market FD, LAMPS,

channels Industry
state chapter - karnataka

Benefit
VFC, FD
sharing
Forest VFC, FD
protection
Overall
VFC, FD
monitoring
Linking
research FD, Scientists
upto field
(FD – Forest Department, VFC –Village Forest Committee, LAMP – Local Area Minor Forest Product Co-operative
Society)
296 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

In recent years the Government of India has stressed that local communities and the forest
department should jointly manage resources. In about 250 villages of Uttara Kannada, Joint
Forest Planning and Management Committees (JFPMCs), consisting of elected members of the
villages and local forest officers, are beginning to manage degraded forests. Feedback from village
communities has revealed positive signals.
However, it is important to see JFPM as an integral part of state forest policy, and implement
it irrespective of donor funds. In many villages in Karnataka momentum and expectations have
been built up during a period when donor funds were available, only to crash once the project
duration ended. The JFPM process has also not brought standing forests under its jurisdiction.
Several kans are part of JFPM in Shimoga and Uttara Kannada districts, which would be able to
provide immediate benefit to committees due to the potential of NTFPs like pepper (Piper sp.) and
Cinnamomum malabathrum. Hence there is a need to establish link between the kan tradition and
the JFPM process.
Villagers were able to maintain, even in a predominantly agricultural landscape, about 30 per
cent of the land area under forests. Whereas the groves were conserved apparently on religious
grounds, village communities traditionally regulated harvest from supply forests, a system that
continues to this day in the Halkar village forests of Uttara Kannada district. The story of forest
management by the community in Halkar village shows that resources can be managed both
sustainably and equitably to the benefit of much of the local population.
Without the involvement of village communities it will not be possible to safeguard and sustainably
use the biodiversity of this country. The state should aim at rehabilitating and restoring disrupted
ecosystems through the involvement of local communities, and orient them in the local management
of biological resources. But a true empowerment of communities will only be possible when they
have secure tenure. Karnataka has seen a series of interventions from the state, where despite
their best efforts at managing resources effectively, the interests of those in power and of powerful
industries have led to undermining local institutions. Such lack of security and sweeping power to
the government to de-recognise any community effort without any criteria has proved extremely
discouraging, as in case of village forest panchayats mentioned above. But there remains hope,
due to the strong faith of people in informal institutions like sacred groves, and examples such
as the Kodagu devarakadu programme where the state forest department could recognize the
importance of role of communities.

Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful to Narshimha Hegde and Balachandra Hegde for the shared information
on the Western Ghats and Shonil Bhagwat, Kushalappa and Advocate Uthappa for the contribution
on Kodagu. Thanks are also due to the local communities of several villages we have visited and
interacted with over the past several years, mainly in the Western Ghats of Karnataka. Thanks are
also due to the staff of the Centre for Ecological Sciences (Indian Institute of Science) field stations
at Kumta and Sirsi. The authors are also thankful to the reviewers, Sunita Rao and Kanchi Kohli.

M.D. Subhash Chandran is with the Department of Botany, A. V. Baliga College, Kumta. Yogesh
Gokhale is currently an Associate Fellow with The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), New
Delhi.

Endnotes
1
I. K. Murthy, P.V. Rekha, S. Gunaga, S. Patgar, M.B. Naik, Y.H. Prakash, A. Nambi, S. Indrani, Rajashekhar, N.H.
Ravindranath, ‘Community forestry: An ecological, economic and institutional assessment in the Western Ghats’, in
N.H. Ravidranath, K.S. Murali and K.C. Malhotra (eds), Joint forest management and community forestry in India: An
ecological and institutional assessment (Delhi, Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2000), pp. 171-190.
2
www.webkarnataka.com
3
www.censusindia.net/t_00_003.html
4
www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Religiondata_2001.xls
5
http://www.censusindia.net/t_00_005.html
6
http://www.tourismofindia.com/sts/stkarseaside.htm
7
See case study of Halkar village for more details on estuarine farming.
8
www.mapsofindia.com/maps/karnataka/ karnatakaagriculture.htm.
 Karnataka 297
9
This section deals predominantly with Uttara Kannada, as the authors are more familiar with it.
10
G.F.S. Collins, ‘Report on the general conditions of forest administration in Siddapur taluk’,. No. F.O.R. VI-63 dated
15-6-1922,. Forest Settlement Office, Karwar.
11
H. Cleghorn, Forests and Gardens of South India. (London, W.H. Allen and Co., 1861).
12
D. Brandis, D. and Grant, ‘Joint report No. 33’, dated 11th May 1868 on the kans in the Sorab taluka. forest
department, Shimoga, 1868.
13
Editor’s note: This section has been taken largely from Shrinidhi and Lele (2001).
14
A.S. Shrinidhi and Sharachchandra Lele. ‘Forest Tenure Regimes in the Karnataka Western Ghats: A Compendium’,.
Working paper no. 90, Institute of Social and Economic Change, Bangalore (2001).
15
http://www.karnatakaforestdepartment.org/forest_glance/forest_at_glance.htm
16
Shrinidhi and Lele, ‘Forest tenure regimes’. (As above)
17
This order was challenged in the Godavarman case and further order was passed disallowing any removal of dead
diseased, dying logs, etc. Though this order by the CEC set up by Supreme court was meant to stop such commercial
extraction, it caused hardship to local people as the CEC order was interpreted to disallow extraction of NTFP.
18
Shrinidhi and Lele, ‘Forest tenure regimes’. (As above)
19
(As above)
20
M. Gadgil, Berkes, and C. Folke, ‘Indigenous knowledge for biodiversity conservation’, Ambio 22: 151-156
(1993).
21
J.G. Frazer, The Golden Bough, Part I: The Magic Art and the Evolution of Kings, 2 vols (New York, Macmillan,
1935); T. Hay-Edie, and M. Hadley, ‘Natural sacred sites - A comparative approach to their cultural and biological
significance’, in P.S. Ramakrishnan, K.G. Saxena, and U.M. Chandrashekara (eds), Conserving the Sacred for
Biodiversity Management (New Delhi, Oxford and IBH, 1998), pp. 46-67.
22
M.D.S. Chandran, ’On the ecological history of the Western Ghats’, Current Science, 73(2) 146-55 (1997).
23
M.D.S. Chandran, and M. Gadgil, ‘State forestry and decline of food resources in the tropical forests of Uttara
Kannada, Southern India’, in C.M. Hladik, A. Hladik, O.F. Linares, H. Pagezy, A. Semple and M. Hadley (eds), Tropical
Forests, People and Food: Biocultural Interactions and Applications to Development. vol. 15, (Paris, MAB Series,
UNESCO/Parthenon Publishing Group, 1993), pp. 733-44.
24
J.D. Hughes and M.D.S. Chandran, ‘Sacred groves around the earth: An overview’, in Ramakrishnan et al.,
Conserving the Sacred for Biodiversity Management, pp 69-86. (As above)
25
T.F. Bourdillon, Report on the Forests of Travancore. (Trivandrum, Travancore Government Press, 1893).
26
D. Brandis, ‘Indigenous Indian forestry: Sacred groves’ Indian Forestry 12-16 (1897).
27
Reader may refer to Kerala Chapter for similar groves called sarpukavu.
28
Vidya Nayak, personal communication.
29
D. Brandis and Grant, ‘Joint report No. 33’. (As above).
30
M.D.S. Chandran and M. Gadgil, ‘Kans - Safety forests of Uttara Kannada’, in M. Brandl (ed.), Proceedings
of the IUFRO Forest History Group Meeting on Peasant Forestry 2-5 September 1991 (Forstliche Versuchs-und
Forschungsanstalt, Freiburg, 1993), pp 49-57.
31
Y. Gokhale, ‘Assessing plant species diversity in various management regimes in the Western Ghats of Karnataka’,
Report submitted to Winrock International, New Delhi, 2002 (unpublished).
32
Brandis and Grant, ‘Joint report No. 33’. (As above).
33
Deputy Conservator Forest Records, Sagar Division.
34
M.D.S. Chandran, M. Gadgil and D. Hughes, ‘Sacred groves of the Western Ghats of India’, in Ramakrishnan et al.,
Conserving the Sacred for Biodiversity Management. (As above)
35
C.G. Kushalappa and S.A. Bhagwat, ‘Sacred groves: Biodiversity, threats and conservation’, in R. Uma Shaanker,
K.N. Ganeshaiah and Kamaljit S. Bawa (eds), Forest Genetic Resources: Status, Threats and Conservation Strategies
state chapter - karnataka

(Delhi, Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2001).

36
The Gauda was also priest to the temple of the village God.
37
P.S. Ashton, ‘A question of sustainable use’, in J.S. Denslow and C. Padock (eds), People of the Tropical Rain Forest
(Berkeley, University of California Press, 1988).
38
Brandis and Grant, ‘Joint report No. 33’. (As above).
39
R.T. Wingate, ‘Settlement proposals for 16 villages of Kumta taluk’, No. 210 dated 18-12-1888. Deputy Comissioner’s
Office, Karwar.
40
F. Buchanan, A Journey from Madras through the Countries of Mysore, Canara and Malabar, vol.2 (Madras,
Higginbotham, 1870).
41
Government of Bombay, Revenue Department Resolution No. 7211, May 1923.
298 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory
42
Chandran and Gadgil, ‘State forestry and decline of food resources’. (As above).
43
Chandran and Gadgil ‘Kans - Safety forests of Uttara Kannada’. (As above).
44
(As above).
45
Collins, ‘Report on the general conditions’. (As above).
46
(As above).
47
G. Shanmukhappa, ’Working plan for the unorganized forests of Sirsi and Siddapur’, (Bangalore, Karnataka forest
department, 1966).
48
S.C. Thippeswamy, ‘Sirsi town firewood supply plan’ (Bangalore, Government of Mysore, 1963).
49
Shanmukhappa, ’Working plan’. (As above).
50
(As above).
51
Jayakumar, 1988, personal communication.
52
Chandran, Gadgil, and Hughes, ‘Sacred groves of the Western Ghats’. (As above).
53
K.C. Malhotra, S.R. Khomne and M. Gadgil, ‘Hunting strategies among three non-pastoral nomadic groups of
Maharashtra’, Man in India, 63 (1983), pp. 21-39.
54
Forest Department Resolution No. 7212, 1923.
55
Collins, ‘Report on the general conditions’. (As above).
56
Murthy et al.‘Community forestry’. (As above).
57
H.N. Chandrasekharaiah, S.L. Raghavan and M.F. Rahman, ‘Fish Sanctuary, River Cauvery-Case Study
Ramanathapura, Arkalgud Taluk, Hassan District’, in Centre of Ecological Sciences, Karnataka State Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan, vol. II (Bangalore, Centre of Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Sciences, 2002).
58
Editor’s Note: This section has largely been taken from Shrinidhi and Lele, ‘Forest tenure regimes’. (As above).
59
Shrinidhi and Lele, ‘Forest tenure regimes’. (As above).
60
R.J. Rao, K.S. Murali and N.H. Ravindranath ‘Joint forest planning and management (JFPM) in Karnataka: Current
status and future potential’, Wasteland News, May 2002.
61
Proceedings of National Consultative Workshop on Joint Forest Management (JFM), 14-15 July 2005. Ministry of
Environment and Forests and Winrock International India, New Delhi.
62
M. Correa, ‘Gender and Joint Forest Planning and Management: A Research Study in Uttara Kannada District,
Karnataka’ (Dharwad, India Development Service, 1995).
63
Chandran and Gadgil, ‘Kans - Safety forests’. (As above).
64
M. Correa, ‘Gender and Joint Forest Planning and Management: A Research Study in Uttara Kannada District,
Karnataka’ (Dharwad, India Development Service, 1995).
65
Chandran and Gadgil, ‘Kans - Safety forests’. (As above).
 CCA/Kar/CS1/Coorg/Virajpet taluka/Sacred groves

Sacred groves of Virajpet taluka, Coorg

Background
This case study focuses on the current status of the age-old tradition of conserving patches of
forests (termed as sacred groves) housing deities in the Coorg Virajpet taluka of Kodagu district
in Karnataka. These devarakadus, as they are referred to in the local dialect, are located within
an area of over 1500 sq km of Virajpet taluka and number about 500 (the total area that these
sacred groves occupy has not been calculated). This case study is based on research carried out
on 25 such SGs in 20 villages.
The forests in Virajpet along the eastern slopes of the Western Ghats mountains are of the
tropical evergreen type. This study is along the hilly region, which is between 800 and 900 meters
above sea level, where one comes across the Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary.
Some sacred groves of ancient semi-natural forest type are found in an otherwise heavily utilized
agricultural landscape of coffee plantations, paddy fields and habitations. Some of these SGs are
also present in swampy areas, often adjacent to perennial streams, whilst some SGs are on hilly
slopes, in ravines and gullies. The flora and fauna includes woody plants and birds, both of which
are 25 per cent endemic.1

Towards community conservation

The protection of patches of forest is presumed to have started as a safety measure and sometimes
as a supply of resources to the communities protecting it by forming taboos and restrictions on the
resource use.2 Violation of the rules was believed to result in the wrath of the deity associated with
the SG. This age-old tradition, which has modified itself into the ‘Sanskritisation’ mould with the
construction of temples, is still respected and followed by the Kodavu community which forms the
majority community of these villages.
The kodavus are primarily involved in activities in the SGs like cutting of trees, collecting forest
produce, temple use, etc. Within the kodavus, those families that are economically richer than
the others enjoy higher social status. The non-kodavu inhabitants of the villages such as tribals
(yeravas, kurubas, mala kudias, etc.), other non-kodavas (gowdas, brahmins, etc.) and immigrant
communities such as Tamils, Malyalees, etc. form the minority community of the villages and
therefore have little to say on matters concerning the SGs. Not totally excluded, they have some
duties to perform during annual religious gatherings. Settlers from outside or people with different
religious beliefs may not be involved in the festivals at all.
In most cases temple committees have been formed to manage the forests. Where there are no
temple committees, the village councils or village panchayats look after the matters of the SG; laying
down rules, solving disputes, organising festivals and looking into the overall management.
The temple committee normally has a president, who oversees all functioning of the committee,
with all members being answerable to him. Village heads and heads of village
groups are also members of this committee. Another important person is the
dev-thakka who is mainly responsible for the religious activities related
case studies - karnataka

to the temple.
Most of these posts are elected from the same Kodavu family or
clan. People with previous experience with public service may have
a greater prominence in the temple committee. There is no formal
government institution involved, and the government will not interfere
in the decisions made by the temple committee except on issues of
ownership of land.
Before 1901, the SGs were owned by the colonial forest department.
The historical records suggest that the colonial officers were aware of
this local tradition of protecting patches of forest for their religious
significance, and, to the extent possible, respected its cultural value.3
299
300 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Between 1901 and 1985, management of these SGs was handed over to the revenue department.
This resulted in a dramatic change in the land use of many of these groves. They were either sold
or leased out in part or in whole to private individuals for agricultural purposes, mainly for planting
coffee. They were also exploited for fuelwood and small diameter timber, although larger trees
were retained and were presumably never felled due to religious beliefs.
In 1985, the SGs were handed over to the forest department again and notified as reserved
forests. A land survey was undertaken and the boundaries were marked in some areas. In other
areas the SGs are currently being surveyed.
The main association of the people with the SG is religious, and it is a prominent component of
the local culture. Villagers from surrounding areas usually take active part in the annual festival
organized by the temple. It is often a social gathering as well as a traditional forum for resolution
of any disputes or conflicts amongst the villagers.
People are not directly dependent on the SG for livelihood or commercial purposes, except for
those who encroach to cultivate coffee or cardamom, which they are sometimes allowed to do
by the committee in exchange for a portion of the produce for the temple. Sometimes people
extract NTFPs like honey, medicinal plants, resin, edible mushrooms, etc. All other conflicts except
land ownership are dealt with at the temple committee level, normally during temple festivals.
Resolution of conflicts is usually done by an elderly person of the community on behalf of the deity
(when a person gets possessed and speaks a divine language, normally Malayalam, since the
Kodavus believe that their gods came from Kerala.).
No rules or regulations are written, although there are certain norms that are followed, consisting
of dos and don’ts that are passed on from generation to generation. Extraction from the grove
for ‘personal’ purposes is prohibited. If someone from the village tries to encroach on the grove,
strong opposition is raised by members, and the person is asked to compensate for the loss to the
temple committee. If the objective behind felling trees and collection of NTFP is for ‘the greater
common good’, such as at annual festivals, it is not subject to opposition. As the committee has no
legal powers, the temple committees cannot take legal action against the offenders.
Financial support for the maintenance of the SG comes from the community itself. Annual
festivals are organized by individuals or families of the Kodavu community, who share the burden
of expenses. For more popular temples, people from elsewhere also contribute for construction,
renovation, ornaments, jewellery of the deity, to add to the property of the temple committee, etc.
Whether money comes from local sources or from a wider community, all of it is spent on annual
gatherings and no money is spent on conservation of the SGs. Funds also come from compensation
collected from the violators of the SG rules.

Challenges faced by the community

Lately the SGs face threats due to:
1. Decline of religious beliefs and lack of awareness about nature conservation traditions amongst
the younger generation that is more exposed to modern life-styles.
2. The new immigrants who do not have the same belief system pose a threat to the future of the
protected forests.
3. ‘Sanskritisation’ of the tradition of nature worship, leading to idol worship and ritualistic beliefs,
often bypassing the SG itself.
4. There has been a trend of cutting trees and planting exotic species like silver oak, as coffee
plantations require shade.
5. Constant encroachments on the SG land due to pressures of coffee/cardamom plantations, as
they form the major income of most Kodavus, is observed, and any fluctuations in coffee prices
in the market on the lower side leads to cutting down of trees and selling timber for cash from
common property resources, including sometimes from the SGs.
The relationship between the field staff of the forest department and the community is harmonious.
However, people in general are unhappy with the policies of the FD and believe that their policies
lead to exploitation of Kodavu forests for the benefit of the state.4 There have been some complaints
by the villagers about crop raiding by elephants, especially in the villages near the boundaries of
protected areas (Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary and Nagarhole National Park). However there are
no major grievances about wildlife in SGs.
 Karnataka 301

This case study is written by Shonil Bhagwat, Oxford Forestry University. This is based on his
First Year Assessment Report (D. Phil), Oxford Forestry Institute (1999), Department of Plant
Sciences, University of Oxford, UK. Unpublished.

For more details contact:

Shonil Bhagwat
Oxford Forestry University,
Dept. of Plant Sciences,
University of Oxford, OX1 3RB, U.K.
E-mail: Shonil.Bhagwat@gmail.com
Or check www.kodava.org.

C.G. Kushalappa
Dept. of Wildlife, & Forest Biology,
College of Forestry, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore,
Ponnampet,
South Kodagu,
Karnataka 571216

Endnotes
1
B.R. Ramesh, J.P. Pascal and C. Nougouier, Atlas of the Endemics of the Western Ghats (India) – Distribution of
Tree Species in the Evergreen and Semi-evergreen Forests (Institute Francaise de Pondicherry, India, 1997); and
R. Grimmett, C. Inskipp and T. Inskipp, Birds of the Indian Subcontinent (London, Christopher Helm, A&C Black,
1998).
2
P.S. Ramakrishnan, ‘Conserving the Sacred for Biodiversity: The Conceptual Framework’, in P.S. Ramakrishnan,
K.G. Saxena and U.M. Chandrashekara (eds), Conserving the Sacred for Biodiversity Management (New Delhi,
UNESCO, Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 1998).
3
D. Brandis Indian Forestry (Oriental University Institute), pp. 12-14.
4
Anon. n.d. ‘CNC urges HC judge to save tree from felling’, Coffeeland News, On-line edition http://kodava.org/
Newsevts.asp.

case studies - karnataka

 CCA/Kar/CS2/Mandya/Kokkare Bellur/Heronry

Kokkare Bellur village, Mandya

Background
Kokkare Bellur village is situated in Mandya District, 80
kilometers from the state capital, Bangalore. Its landscape
resembles that of a typical dry land with the perennial Shimsha
flowing to its south. Cultivated and fallow fields, cactus hedges
and old and new trees of tamarind, banyan, pipal, babul, gular
or atthi, neem, mother-in-law’s tongue tree, mango, rain tree,
portia, mark the landscape.
For six months of the year, Kokkare Bellur looks like any
other village in South Karnataka. But from December to June
hundreds of spot billed pelicans and painted storks move into
and occupy the tamarind and banyan tree tops, to nest and
breed in the heart of the village. The pelicans arrive first and
settle on the crown of mature large canopied trees, while the
lighter and more agile storks come in a few weeks later and
settle on the outer branches of the same trees. Some trees
are so populated that the nests touch one another. Over the
following six months birds and humans by and large co-exist
peacefully as they have done for generations. It is as if the
entire village gets a two-tiered structure with the humans living
downstairs and the birds living upstairs.
Besides these birds, this tiny village plays host to at least 139 Birds roosting at Kokkare Bellur
other bird species, including little grebe, grey heron, night heron, heronry Photo: Ashish Kothari
white ibis, purple moorhen, whitespotted fantail flycatcher and
many others.

Towards community conservation

History has it that the storks and the pelicans have been coming to Kokkare Bellur to breed for
hundreds of years. Previously the village was situated on the bank of the river Shimoga (a major
tributary of the Kaveri River) and the birds lived there with the villagers. A plague in 1916, forced
the villagers to abandon the area and set up the current village a few kilometers from the river.
The birds moved with the people. This might explain the strange choice of breeding ground of
these birds away from a large water body.
For a long time, this extraordinary village had escaped the notice of wildlifers, bird enthusiasts
and forest officers. Dr. Salim Ali too did not know of this pelicanry, when he discovered Ranganthittu
and got it declared a bird sanctuary in 1940. The only possible reference to this village may be found
in the 1864 writings of British naturalist, T.C. Jerdon where he makes the following observation: “I
have visited the Pelicanry in the Carnatic, where the pelicans have built their rude nests, on rather
low trees in the midst of the village, and seemed to care little for the close and constant proximity
of human beings.” Further he describes the spotbilled pelican as the most abundant species found
case studies - karnataka

in India, occurring in all districts where rivers and tanks abound. After 130 years, the same species
is on the endangered list, with not more than 5000 birds in the whole of South Asia1 and only 10
breeding sites left in India, Kokkare Bellur being one of the most significant.
So who are these people, that the birds love to live in close proximity with even though there
is no large water tank or river in the village? The current human population of the village is
around 30002. The dominant occupations have been agriculture apart from which there are potters
(kumbara-shetty), fishermen (ganga matha) carpenters (aachari) and silkworm rearers. Besides
animal husbandry, sericulture, sand dredging and labour on village farms as well as in surrounding
urban areas, are also practiced.

302
 Karnataka 303

As to their relationship with the birds, the older generation have in the
past, followed a policy of benevolent tolerance, a policy of live and let
live. They had willingly given up their claim to the tamarind harvest from
trees in their backyards when these trees were selected by the birds for
nesting. They believed that the arrival of the birds assured good luck for
the village and their absence was associated with drought and murders.
People preferred to get their daughters married to the son of a family that had
birds in their backyard, as this was considered a sign of prosperity.
One important benefit that villagers receive from the birds is the
droppings or guano, which is used as fertilizer for agriculture. The
villagers dig huge pits around the trees that the birds select to nest and allow
the phosphate and nitrogen rich bird droppings to accumulate. These are then
mixed with the silt from the nearby lakes and spread in the guano pit. This exercise i s
repeated several times in the nesting period so that the layers of guano and silt alternate in a
sandwich effect. This provides ready mixed compost which is then spread over the field. Another
benefit from this practice is that the removal of silt from the lakes prevents them from silting up.
Children in the village have for generations been taught not to tease birds or steal their eggs.
When hunting tribes and outsiders were caught harming the birds in any way they were arrested
by the local panchyat and asked for a penalty of Rs. 100, a princely sum for both the villagers and
the tribe, where the barter system still played a large role in the economy. Failure to pay the fine
resulted in being tied up to trees or being locked up in a room for a day.
Since the 1990s, however, changes have occurred in the lifestyle and attitudes of the people,
due to the influences of the larger developmental model being pursued by the country at large.
This change manifests itself in a number of ways like in many other villages across India. Today
mud walls are making way for brick walls, local tiles making way for Mangalore tiles, earthen
pots and pans being replaced with gaudy plastic ones, the dark brown nutritious raagi (finger
millet) dumplings losing favour as local staple diet and making way for white polished rice. Further
manifestations of this change can be seen in rich farmers increasingly growing cash crops and
using chemical fertilizers and pesticides, whereas earlier they grew a variety of dry land nutritious
millets and beans. Motorised vehicles have also entered the village life.
Behavioural patterns also manifest this change, e.g. families of potential brides that once looked
for families with guano pits in their backyard, now give the young men of such families a wide
berth, as the once auspicious guano pit is now seen as a source of trouble and hard work for the
bride to be. As a result today most graduate youth migrate out to the cities looking for jobs. The
free and abundant availability of phosphate and nitrogen rich guano had for long staved off the use
of urea in the fields. However the cheap and easy availability of urea and the ease of application
of the same to the farm vis-à-vis the long drawn and relatively messy method of preparing natural
fertilizer from the guano is attracting more villagers to the idea of replacing guano with urea,
breaking an important link in the human-bird symbiotic relationship.
Change can also be seen in the new acquisitions in the village. Kokkare Bellur has not been
left untouched by the overall atmosphere of increased consumerism and urbanization that has
overtaken the country. The lure of buying things from far off markets has necessarily increased the
dependence of the locals on the market economy and increased their need for money. This coupled
with the fact that there are no innovative yet sustainable income generation schemes within the
village creates intense competition for all cash providing resources, and this includes the resources
shared traditionally with the birds.
It was in this scenario that Manu K., founder member of the NGO Mysore Amateur Naturalists
(MAN), came to the village in 1994 on a habitat assessment program. This proved to be the
beginning of MAN’s long and committed association with Kokkare Bellur working towards the
case studies - karnataka

re-establishment of harmony between the birds and humans. Towards this, MAN initiated the
formation of a local youth group called the Hejjarle Balaga (Pelican Clan) to look after the welfare
of the birds in general and fallen and injured pelican and stork chicks in particular. A local farmer
B. Linge Gowda, donated a part of his land for the use of a pen, which has been fenced so that
dogs and other predators do not get to the helpless chicks. As of 2006, the youth and children of
Hejjarle Balaga have put back around 300 pelicans into the wild. An impressive number when one
considers the endangered status of the birds. Chicks that fall to the ground and would otherwise
perish, are taken into the pen, fed, tended to and raised to the fledgling stage, then returned to
the wild to join their naturally raised siblings. Besides counteracting the drastic decline in pelican
and painted stork numbers, this exercise seeks to and has been successful in recreating and
strengthening the close bond between the children/youth and the birds while giving a hands on
experience in the daily care of these birds. Hejjarle Balaga members also actively plant tamarind
and ficus trees along the road, clean the irrigation tanks that are the foraging grounds of the birds
304 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

and discourage people from either cutting trees or picking fruits from the trees that birds have
chosen for nesting in their backyards. In 1998, members of Hejjarle Balaga successfully stopped
a local farmer from cutting his tamarind tree on which birds were nesting. The group asked the
farmer to lease his tree to Hejjarle Balaga for the season instead of harvesting the tamarind from
the tree and disturbing the birds. Ultimately a combination of moral pressure from the group along
with a little financial benefit persuaded the farmer to leave the trees for the birds.
Some recent intervention by the members of the Hejjarle Balaga helped stop a road widening
plan that would have involved cutting of some wayside trees. Between 2004 and 2006 many birds
had got accidentally electrocuted on the high tension lines that passed through the village very
near to the nesting trees. The community has been successful in getting the authorities to increase
the distance between the power lines and the neutral lines of the high tension wires, which has put
an end to the birds getting electrocuted.
Besides this, older Hejjarle Balaga members act as resource people in the many camps that
are conducted for urban schools in the summer holidays. The younger children repeatedly attend
the workshops filled with slideshows, stories, activities and drama, and will themselves be useful
resource people someday. Many bird watchers, researchers, film and TV crews and newspaper
photographers visit the village and young Hejjarle Balaga members spontaneously help these
visitors spot and identify birds. Children also show the visitors around the pen where the birds
are kept and explain what is done here. All this is done free of cost and the only payback is in the
inherent act and a sense of pride about the uniqueness of their village.
However as this generation grows up, the reality of earning a livelihood in the village will have to
be dealt with else these bright young conservationists will be lost to the city where they will go to
earn a living. Currently MAN, through personal donations funds the salary of two Hejjarle Balaga
members, who carry the main responsibility of looking after the pen, getting the fish and feeding
and looking after the birds with the help of the other younger members.
A personal donation in 2006 has helped Hejjarle Balaga purchase an adjoining piece of land with
a few large tamarind trees on it. It is hoped that more birds will come here. There are also plans to
set up a local bird interpretation centre on this plot, with local material and local resource people.
Other plans to link village prosperity with the pelicans is to set up a small tea shop and a souvenir
shop. The idea being that the locals regulate the inflow of visitors so as not to disturb either the
nesting birds or the villagers’ way of life.

Impacts of community effort

In 2006, the bird nest count stood at an all time high of 400, and Kokkare Bellur was identified
as one of the Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in India by Birdlife International3. The village has also
been assessed as the seventh important hotspot in Karnataka with regards to biodiversity.

Opportunities and constraints

Roles of the government agencies
The role of the forest department in protecting this amazing pelicanry
has been sporadic, largely failing to support the initiative. The primary
reason for this has been the lack of recognition of the role played by the
local community in the existence of this bird heaven. As per S.G. Neginhal
(DCF retd.), who was a wildlife officer in Mysore from 1972 to 1976 the
FD had no knowledge of the existence of Kokkare Bellur. In 1976, when
the FD became aware of the village, they appointed a local man as a
forest guard to step up the protection. In 1982, when the Bannerghatta
National Park was being set up in Bangalore, the FD tried to transfer
some pelican chicks from the village without consulting the panchyat.
The vehicle carrying the chicks was ghearoed (surrounded) by the
vilagers, but on realizing that the chicks could not be put back in the nest, the
FD employee was allowed to take the birds to the national park.
In the 1980s, the department issued a protection order, under the Karnataka Tree
Protection Act (KTPA), regarding the trees used for nesting. The order stated that
such trees could not be felled even by their owners unless they were diseased or
dead. However in 1987, when a powerful local farmer felled a huge, perfectly healthy
banyan tree used for nesting in his compound, no punishment was forthcoming.
Such inconsistencies in the behaviour of the FD, led to a disregard for the order
 Karnataka 305

passed under the KTPA. The FD then proposed to

buy out every tree used for nesting, which was not
acceptable to the tree owners. Finally a compromise
was reached, whereby the villagers were to be given
an annual allowance for the trees on their property
that the birds used for nesting. The amount offered
was and continues to be much lower than the
income that might have accrued to the owners had
they harvested and sold the tamarind from the
trees, but it does provide some incentive to keep
the trees in the face of increased dependence on a
cash economy.
In 1996-97, the FD needed to spend two lakh K Manu with a member of the Hejjare Balaga at the
(200,000) rupees and unilaterally decided to spend bird rescue centre Photo: Ashish Kothari
the sum on building a watchtower very near to the
nesting trees so that the visitors could see the birds up close. The local community opposed this
wasteful expenditure on the ground that this would frighten the birds away; they also felt that the
money could be better utilised in planting more trees and providing for tree guards for the young
plants. The opposition led to a nasty altercation between the villagers and the officials of the FD
and while the construction of the viewing tower was stopped the money was not made available
for the trees and tree guards either. Recently however the FD has been involved in plantation of
trees in the area. However it has yet to win the trust of the locals, who feel that the plantations are
yet again an outcome of the need to spend a certain amount of money before the end of a fiscal
year rather than any genuine concern for the birds.
The distrust created by such ill-conceived interventions from the FD has led to the loss of an
opportunity where both FD and local people could have worked together for the betterment of the
birds and the village. The internal split of jurisdiction within the FD has led to further confusion. The
split is between the territorial division in charge of the welfare of the trees and the wildlife division
in charge of the welfare of the birds and often these two divisions work at cross-purposes.
Among the significant threats to the bird are ill conceived development plans that might put
the birds at risk. Among these are a road widening project (which has been stopped for the time
being), and the grandiose plans of the Tourism Department to set up a holiday resort close to
Kokkare Bellur. As far as is known, there has been no research done to assess the viability or
desirability of such a project, let alone the effect that such development will have on the birds.
Internal issues
As cheap and easy to acquire urea, insecticides and pesticides replace guano and natural methods
of pest control, the lakes are increasingly at the receiving end of agricultural waste and sewage.
The excessive use of chemicals has increased the level of nitrogenous nutrients which have led to
the uncontrolled growth of weeds and reeds in the water bodies, reducing the expanse of water
available to the birds to catch fish. Also pelicans being at the top of the aquatic food chain, are
susceptible to pesticide poisoning.
The urban tourists that come in also display the huge difference in the material prosperity
between the villagers and their urban counterparts.
Local inequities play a large role as most villagers see the powerful get away with tree cutting
and other violations. Additionally, there is no stable institution for grievance redressal and to
resolve internal disputes.
To make matters worse the local panchyat has been merged with the village panchyats of four
other villages. This has eroded the traditional leadership of the village which had proactively
case studies - karnataka

protected the birds.

Aspirations of the local people are changing in keeping with the general consumerism that prevails
in the country. This coupled with lack of creative and sustainable ways to earn a livelihood within
the village has created a situation of dissatisfaction. Such a situation can easily create apathy
for the birds as well as can put humans in competition with resources that were earlier allotted
graciously to the birds but now are seen as cash-generating.
Favourable opportunities
On the positive side, Kokkare Bellur has a rich tradition of living with the birds and the wide
interest generated by visitors and ample newspaper, radio and TV and film coverage have made
the locals aware of their rich heritage, one which they had earlier taken for granted and begun to
lose interest in.
306 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The continuous work by committed MAN members and the growing up of a generation of Hejjarle
Balaga youth provides available, well-trained individuals, who under the right conditions can lead
the conservation effort as and when needed.
Obtaining additional land and trees and the starting up of work towards getting a local bird
interpretation centre will provide some livelihoods and further impetus to carry on the work of
conservation.
The many small victories that the locals have had in protecting the birds and the fact that they
have single-handedly put back 300 injured birds back into the wild cannot but give encouragement
and strength to the conservation process.
Kokkare Bellur has a lot going for it, but requires the will of all concerned to ensure that the birds
return in larger numbers every year.

Conclusion
While the threats cannot be wished away and one must deal with these bottlenecks to bird and
human prosperity, one cannot but feel hopeful of the future when one sees the strong link between
the children and the birds in the village. According to Erica Taraporewala, Kalpavriksh member who
witnessed a Sunday morning following a stormy night in the village in 2006, “Children all over
the village on their own accord had started looking for birds under various nesting trees, chasing
away dogs and bringing in the chicks that had fallen from their nests in the storm. Some spent
the day in the pen, laughing, playing with each other even as they looked after the birds, while
other children were seen showing birds to a camera crew that had come to the village. And all this
was done with such joyous spontaniety, clearly showing that the intrinsic connection between the
children and the birds that has been strengthened by the quiet and consistent efforts of MAN and
Hejjarle Balaga.” Will this endure in the face of the threats which are as true as this connection?
Only time will tell.

This information has been extracted from: Manu, K. and Sara Jolly (2000). Pelicans and
People: The Two-Tier Village of Kokkare Bellur, Karnataka, India. Kalpavriksh and International
Institute of Environment and Development, Pune. The information was further updated by
Erica Taraporewala based on a visit to Kokkare Bellur in 2007.

For more information contact:

K. Manu
Mysore Amateur Naturalists
571, 9th Cross, Anikethana Road, Kuvempunagar
Mysore 570 023
Karnataka
Ph: 09886383793
Email: pelicanmanu@gmail.com
Or
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa
908 Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411004
Maharashtra
India
Ph: 020-25675450
Website: www.kalpavriksh.org

Endnotes
1
Asian Wetland Bureau Mid-winter Waterfowl Census, 1993
2
Personal communication with K.Manu in March 2007.
3
Organisation based in England and working for conservation and protection of bird species across the world.
 CCA/Kar/CS3/Shimoga/Hunsur/Sacred groves

Hunsur village, Shimoga

Background
Hunsur village is located at a distance of about 12 km from Sagar town of Shimoga district. It
is situated on the Sagar-Honnavar road and falls under the Maraatur Panchayat. The nearest bus
stop is 1 km and the nearest railway station is 56 km from the village, in Talguppa.
There are about 180 households with a population of 900 in this village. Agriculture is the
mainstay in the village. The people grow paddy, arecanut, coconut, cotton, sugarcane, banana,
groundnut, vegetables and spices like cardamom, pepper and ginger. Naiks, madivaals, and havik
brahmins are the major communities residing here. There is a primary school in the village and
a high school is situated at a distance of 5 km. The landscape of the area around the village is of
agricultural land and deciduous forests.
Hunsur has been protecting a sacred grove, Aigala Mathada kanu or Hunsur kanu, for generations.
Legally the forests under the grove are reserved forests, brought under government control during
British rule (for details, refer to Karnataka state chapter). The terrain of the grove is almost flat.
The approximate area of the grove is about 50 ha. The major species that are present here are
mango, dhupa, uppage, aradala or murinahuli and shuntikayi mara.

Towards community conservation

Although the sacred grove had existed for generations in the village, it was only about 40 years
ago that the protection efforts started with a new vigour. Facing indifference and overuse, the
forests around the village were gradually degrading, including those in the sacred grove. This
degradation directly affected the availability of water in the village. Realisation about decreasing
availability of water led to the formation of the Hunsur Gramabhivruddhi Trust (HGT) for forest
protection.
Certain rules and regulations followed by the villagers with respect to the sacred grove include:
1. No one is allowed to cut the green trees or green leaves from the conserved area.
2. Outside villagers are not allowed free entry into the forest.
3. Villagers are allowed to collect NTFP in a sustainable manner.
4. Dry leaves are allowed to be collected from the forest.
5. Fuelwood from this forest is auctioned to the villagers once a year during the summer.
Offenders are fined an amount ranging from Rs 10 to 1000 by the Gramabhivruddhi Trust. The
money obtained through fines is collected by the HGT and is used for developmental activities in
the village.
Till about a decade ago, the village followed a system of patrolling the forests by rotation. This
system was called kuyilugatti system. Kuyilugatti in the local language means a kind of sword. The
sword would be kept in the households of the village by rotation, throughout the year. The family
case studies - karnataka

in whose house this sword is kept undertakes the responsibility of protecting the conserved forest.
This practice has now been abandoned.
Within the village, the conservation effort was initiated by the older generation but the younger
generation is well aware of the importance of this effort.

Impacts of community conservation

The conserved area has a good vegetation canopy. Villagers claim an increase in the groundwater
level since the protection started. Villagers are now able to procure a good quantity of fuelwood
and dry leaves for making farmyard manure. The efforts by the HGT for the conservation practices
in the sacred grove have also been recognised and won awards from the government.
307
308 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Constraints and opportunities

K.C. Khannappa, an active member of the trust, recalls that there have been three or four
attempts by the government to cut the trees within the grove. In 1967 the Karnataka forest
department (KFD) gave out a contract for logging of trees in this area. In 1969 some plywood
factories received a tender for selective felling of trees. In 1971, a contract was given to extract
dalchini bark. However in all these cases the villagers have successfully avoided the entry of
outsiders by staging a dharna (demonstration) and satyagraha.
Earlier, in 1961, a local landowner, who had started to encroach upon this forest area by digging
trenches, was also stopped by the villagers.
Over the years the villagers have also received help from a few NGOs, including the Vruksha
Laksha Andolan and Seva Sagar Trust, in their efforts. These NGOs have launched an abhiyaan
(campaign) for protection of the sacred groves in this region.

This case study has been contributed by Mr. Narsimha Hegde/ Balachandra Hegde in the year
2001. Additional information was added from the ‘Saving the Western Ghats Ecology’ section
of The Hindu dated 23 September 1999.

For more details contact:

Narsimha Hegde/Balachandra Hegde,
C/o Pandurang Hegde,
Basavaraja Nilaya,
Chowkimath, Sirsi - 581 401
Uttara Kannada
Karnataka
 CCA/Kar/CS4/Shimoga/Shiroor Allali/Sacred grove

Shiroor Alalli village, Shimoga

Background
Shiroor Alalli village falls within the Maraatur Panchayat of Sagar taluka in Shimoga district of
Karnataka. This village is located at a distance of 10 km from Sagar on the Sagar-Honnavar road
and is adjacent to the Bangalore-Honnavar highway. The village has a bus stop in the vicinity and
the railway station is 3 kilometers away in Talguppa.
The village houses approximately 120 families with a population of nearly 700 people. The
traditional form of housing of tiled roofs is distinct. Agriculture is the major occupation, with
secondary occupations like trading, and service. The important crops grown here are arecanut,
coconut, paddy, sugarcane, groundnut and banana. The village has a primary school for children
which is located at a distance of 1 km from the village and a high school which is located at a
distance of 3 km from the village.
Forest type around the village is moist deciduous to semi-evergreen. Geographically the terrain
includes gently sloping forest hills. The villagers practice conservation in about 40 ha of the forest
since it is considered sacred by the local villagers. Locally, this sacred grove is called adergudde.
Major species present in the forest include hunal, matti, honne, nandi, sandalwood and bamboo.

Towards community conservation

Forest conservation efforts in this village were inspired by the similar efforts being carried out by
the neighbouring village Hunsur Kanu. About 16 years ago the villagers of Shiroor Alalli decided to
give full protection to the adergudde area. The adergudde area was almost a degraded land due to
exhaustive logging activity, timber smuggling and forest resource exploitation. The villagers then
set up a committee called Alalli Gramabhivruddhi Samiti (AGS) to protect the area. The committee
has formulated some rules and regulations that are strictly practiced till date. These include:
1. Prohibition against cutting of green trees and collection of green leaves.
2. Dry leaves from the forest can only be brought by headload.
3. Fuelwood from this forest can be collected only twice a year and use of any vehicle to transport
it is prohibited.
4. A fine ranging from Rs 25-400 is levied on those accused of cutting trees or collecting green
leaves, depending upon the degree of the offence.
5. Outsiders to the village are restricted from free entry into the conserved area.
These decisions have been worked out and are being implemented entirely by the village. There
is no involvement of NGOs or any other external body in the initiative.

Impacts of community effort

The marked conserved area is offered effective protection by the villagers. Subsequent to the
case studies - karnataka

protection the area exhibits good vegetation canopy mostly with young trees. The money obtained
from the penalty claimed by the committee from offenders is redirected towards village development
activities. Additionally, because of greater availability, villagers’ need for fuelwood and dry leaves
is being partly met from these forests. The evident output towards protection of the sacred grove
area has won the AGS an award from the state government.

Opportunities and constraints

Villagers strongly feel that conservation efforts in the sacred grove are putting pressure on
the forest resources that lie outside the sacred grove’s boundaries. With an increase in people’s
needs, their requirements are regularly being met by consuming resources from these surrounding
forests.
309
310 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Conclusion
This case study indicates that when protecting an area for the sake of religious sentiments did
not work, regulated use of the resources for meeting basic requirements actually led towards
conservation efforts. However, in the initial years of protection, the pressure on the surrounding
forests increased. But in the long run regeneration of resources will only help reduce that
pressure.

This case study has been compiled by Narsimha Hegde and Balachandra Hegde, c/o Pandurang
Hegde, Basavaraja Nilaya, Chowkimath, Sirsi- 581 401, Uttara Kannada. The information was
provided in the year 2002. Another source for information is a feature ‘Saving the Western
Ghats’, Ecology Section of The Hindu, dated 23 September 1999.

For more details contact:

Narsimha Hegde/Balachandra Hegde,
C/o Pandurang Hegde,
Basavaraja Nilaya,
Chowkimath,
Sirsi- 581 401
Uttara Kannada
 CCA/Kar/CS5/Tumkur/Kaggaladu/Heronry

Kaggaladu village, Tumkur

Background
The tiny village of Kaggaladu is located 9 km to the north-west of Sira Town of Tumkur District, in
Karnataka. This village is inhabited by about 500-600 people. Agriculture is the primary occupation
of the villagers and they mainly grow ragi (finger millet), wheat and groundnuts. Another source of
income is the sale of tamarind that grows on the trees in and around the village.
This village has undertaken effective conservation efforts for birds like painted storks and grey
herons, which flock here in plenty for nesting purposes every year.

Towards community conservation

In 1999 this village experienced a strange happening. Hundreds of painted storks descended
upon this village for nesting and breeding purposes. For about 9 years before this, these bright and
colorful birds had only been spotted in ones and twos in paddy fields and by the lakeside. Since
1999 (barring in 2005, which was a drought year), these migratory birds have been returning to
this village for nesting every year. Enthusiastic and strict protection to these birds is voluntarily
offered by the villagers. Villagers have a warm bonding with these winged beauties and some
believe that they are harbingers of rain and prosperity.
The villagers were initiated into conservation by a local farmer Shivappa, who first offered
protection to the birds after learning that these avian visitors came from far off lands and were
endangered species. The villagers tried to approach government officials for the protection of the
birds but they did not get any positive response. They then decided to take up protection of the
birds by themselves. An informal local body has been formed in the village for the protection of
the birds, anyone in the village can be the member of this body and Shivappa continues to play
an important role.
Most of the birds nest on tamarind trees, some of which are owned by the villagers while others
are owned by the government. The tamarind harvest generates an annual income of Rs. 3,000
per tree. The tamarind harvest time coincides with the nesting period of the birds. The local gram
panchayat has imposed a ban on the auctioning of tamarind fruits from all trees irrespective of
their ownership. The implication of the rule is to create no hindrance for the birds and not to
displace them from the trees. Rs. 3,000 per tree is paid by the forest department to the owners to
compensate for the loss. In 1999, the state forest department sanctioned an amount of Rs. 10,000
to erect fences around the nine tamarind trees which were home to these birds. The villagers
actively participate in protection including children who also protect and rear the young ones that
fall from their nests accidentally either due to strong pre-monsoon winds or due to over-nesting.
In 1999, some members of Wildlife Aware Nature Club (WANC), a NGO based at Tumkur and
working for conservation issues in Karnataka, got involved with the protection of the birds along
with the villagers. These members lived in villages nearby. They submitted a request to the forest
department, subsequent to which a veterinary doctor of the neighboring village Gaudgere, started
paying regular visits to Kaggaladu for providing treatment to the injured birds.
case studies - karnataka

The NGO started an orphanage for the fallen and injured birds. Initially, fish fallen from the
beaks of feeding parent birds were used as a source of food for the injured young ones. However,
increasingly that is not enough and fish has to be bought from the market to feed all birds in the
orphanage. WANC then approached the fisheries department to provide fish for this purpose.

Opportunities and constraints

Since protection is afforded by the villagers, there is little threat to the birds in the village. One
of the major reasons that the birds roost in the village is the presence of a number of traditional
irrigation tanks/wetlands within 20 km radius of the village. These include Kallambella tank,
Handenahalli/ Lakshmisagar tank, Kaggaladu big tank and Hosur tank. These tanks provide easy
availability of food for the birds.
311
312 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The real threat to these birds comes when the birds are feeding at these tanks. In 1999, when
the birds made news in the local papers, there was a rise in the number of poaching incidents
at these tanks. Based on the information from WANC and the highlighting of this issue in the
local news papers by WANC, action was initiated by the late M.N.Narayanaswamy, local deputy
conservator of forests (DCF) and Suresh K Mohammad, Superintendent of Police to prevent such
acts. A number of unlicensed guns were seized from the area. Meanwhile, a group of 30 village
youths came together to form the Bannada Kokkre Rakshana Samithi (a committee to save the
painted storks) for action against poachers. Since then, there have been some new incidents of
poaching in 2007 at Lakshmisagara wetland and action needs to be taken again.
When the place made headlines in 1999, there was a big influx of tourists to see the birds. These
urban tourists would bring polluting vehicles and plastics, which disturbed the environment of the
village. Tourist activities have been controlled to a certain extent by display boards describing a
set of ‘dos and donts’. These boards have been put up by the local forest department. The village
youth ensure that the rules related to bird protection are enforced and birds are not disturbed.

Conclusions
This initiative is an example of how local villagers conserve birds with the district level NGO
(WANC) using its resources to highlight threats to these birds and the territorial wing of the
state forest department using its resources to conserve wildlife under its jurisdiction. The forest
department now compensates the villagers for the economic losses suffered by them. The villagers
consider these birds as a part of their village and do not feel that their resources are being exploited
by making provisions for these birds. The villagers innately understand that the birds have to be
protected, as they are indicators of sound environment conditions. There is a need to build on this
understanding and extend all possible help and support as and when they require, rather than co-
opting their initiative.

This case study has been compiled based on information in Ahmed A. ‘Large nesting colony
of Painted Storks and Grey Herons identified in Karnataka’, Newsletter for Birdwatchers, Vol.
39, No: 2, (Bangalore, Mar-April 1999). ‘Painted Storks make a beeline for K’taka village’ (The
Indian Express, All India edition, 22 March, 1999). Information was further updated by Ameen
Ahmed, Bangalore, in 2007.

For more details contact:

Ameen Ahmed
Wildlife Aware Nature Club
Ghouse Buildings,
Horpet Main Road
Tumkur 572 101
Tel: 0816 2271643
Cell: 98800 00973
Website: www.wanc.org
Email: tumkurameen@gmail.com, savewildlife_ameenindia@yahoo.com
 CCA/Kar/CS6/Tumkur/Nagavalli/Slender loris protection

Nagavalli village, Tumkur

Background
Located in Tumkur district about 86 km from Bangalore, Nagavalli village peacefully co-exists
with an endangered species, the slender loris, the smallest of the primates in India. Slender loris
is found in abundance in and around Nagavalli village, and thanks to a government high school
teacher the village is well aware and proud of this wealth in their backyard.

Towards community conservation

In 1996 some children saw two small ‘monkeys’ sleeping on a bamboo clump in the school
compound. When the villagers searched the clumps, they were found to be slender loris which
excited everyone, recalls the school teacher V. Gundappa . According to him subsequently several
people in the vicinity started reporting to Gundappa about spotting the rare animal in their areas
too. These primates are found in Lakkenahalli, Sopanahalli, Timmasandra, Pannasandra, Banavara,
Bidrekatte, Dommanakuppe and Bellagere, all neighbouring villages of Nagavalli.
Today, children from schools in and around Tumkur visit Nagavalli to see the animal. Villagers’
have made friends with the loris and no one harms them. “We are used to seeing these animals
throughout the day. Sometimes in the evenings we see them crossing the road or moving in the
bush,’’ says Maruthi, a villager. Interestingly, slender loris can be easily spotted only during nights
because it is a nocturnal animal. But, in Nagavalli, even a school kid can guide you to the tree
where slender loris rest in broad daylight.
“Today, these primates are facing the danger of habitat destruction. A few electric wires which
have come up in the village are also posing a threat. We have requested the government department
to insulate the electric wires where the loris is usually found” says Gundappa. According to Tumkur
deputy conservator of forests M. Parameshwar, the department could not make Nagavalli a popular
spot as the exact number of these animals was difficult to estimate. Conservationists are now
planning to put pressure on the forest department to declare the village as community conservation
reserve, however that must be done with the consent of the villagers and with their full participation.”

This case study has been taken from Upadhye, A.S. ‘This village has an unusual friend’. The
Sunday Times of India, Times City (Bangalore). Also see: http://epaper.timesofindia.com/
Daily/skins/TOI/navigator.asp?Daily=TOIBG&login=default&AW=1190527197187.Or write to:
amit.upadhye@timesgroup.com

For more details contact:

Ameen Ahmed
Wildlife Aware Nature Club
Ghouse Buildings,
Horpet Main Road
case studies - karnataka

Tumkur 572 101

Tel: 0816 2271643
Cell: 98800 00973
Website: www.wanc.org
Email:tumkurameen@gmail.com
savewildlife_ameenindia@yahoo.com

313
 CCA/Kar/CS7/Uttara Kannada/Doddabail/Forest conservation

Doddabail, Uttara Kannada

Background
Doddabail is a little hamlet near Bhairumbe Village, which is about 12 km from Sirsi town, in
Uttara Kannada District of Karnataka. It is a typical village of the Malnad area of the Western
Ghats, situated in the midst of reserve forests, betta land, areca nut orchards, and paddy fields.
About 15 maratha families live here in mud huts with tiled roofs. Eight of them own land, while
others are landless. All the landless are engaged in farm labour.

Towards community conservation

The effort by this community to protect a largish patch of reserve forest around them is unique to
the area. It all began around 1988-9 (villagers do not remember the exact year but say that Shri
Bommai was then the Chief Minister of Karnataka). The forest department was carrying out massive
afforestation of the area by planting Australian acacia all over. When they reached Doddabail, the
villagers (then only eight families) strongly protested and voiced their opinion against the acacia
plantations, their reason being that since no grass grew in these plantations, cattle could not graze
there, and that acacia itself was inedible. Their effort was backed by a local farmer, K.M. Hegde,
who was respected and had some clout with the higher-ups. ‘You grow your forests, we’ll grow
ours,’ they told the forest department officials. Arvind Hegde, who was the Ranger at that time,
was wise enough to be sympathetic to the villagers’ request. Hence the barbed wire around a bare
slope was removed, and the villagers took over some 25 acres of land for protection. Interestingly
neither is there a written agreement between the forest department and the villagers, nor have
any boundaries been marked. Legally, this area is still a reserved forest under the jurisdiction of
the department.
One strict rule for protection has been that the regenerating saplings should not be destroyed
by anyone. Activities such as cattle grazing, firewood collection, etc. are allowed. The firewood
requirements of the village are met from these forests. Cutting of trees or even branches is
strictly prohibited. For the protection of the forest there has been no defined policing system;
however efforts towards protection have worked effectively. Today, there are a number of forest
tree species, such as sandalwood, jamun, jambe, etc. standing tall at over 15 feet in this area that
was once a bare slope. One point of concern is that in this standing forest there is no understorey
and the grass is grazed to the ground. This can have a serious impact on the quality of forests in
the long run.
The land use here is similar to that of regular betta land. The entire protected area has been divided
into eight parts. Each of the original families owning land has access to one part of this land for leaf
litter collection for their areca orchards. Grazing is allowed all over the forests for all 15 families.
The villagers are currently considering putting up a fence and having some regulated system of
grass cutting, rather than allowing free-for-all grazing. They are also considering plantation of local
species of trees, unlike the previous years when only natural regeneration was preferred.
One of the villagers, Negu Alu Marathe (in his 50s) categorically said that cutting trees was like
cutting off the legs of his children. His father, Keriya Kesu Marathe, an old man, rather hard of
hearing, and an original pioneer of the protection work, nodded in affirmation. The women of the
case studies - karnataka

family, Parvati and Kalavathi, also voiced their opinions on the importance of this community effort
to protect their forests.
According to the villagers themselves and also people from outside, Doddabail villagers have a
good understanding and cohesiveness with each other. This has probably been one of the crucial
reasons in the success of the forest protection effort. This also gains importance considering
that village power and party politics can often hijack any sort of simple community work in any
village.
Doddabail is indeed a small but significant example of how community-based conservation can
have its genesis from within, and sustain itself through time. This is also one effort where the

314
 Karnataka 315

people are motivated, and are looking ahead. The effort was started by the older generation but
many in the present generation are also aware of the importance of this effort. Doddabail has
received no outside attention so far.

This case study has been contributed by Sunita Rao, Kalpavriksh, Pune in 2004. The author is
grateful to Shri Nagaraj Joshi for introducing the village to her.

For more details contact:

Sunita Rao
Karkolli Village
Hulekal 581336
Sirsi, Karnataka
E-mail: sunitasirsi@gmail.com
Or
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No 5, Shri Dutta Krupa
908, Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411004
Maharashtra
Website: www.kalpavriksh.org

case studies - karnataka

 CCA/Kar/CS8/Uttar Kannada/Halkar/Forest conservation

Halkar village, Uttara Kannada

Background
Halkar village portrays a community-based conservation system formalised by the British colonial
government as village forest panchayats (VFP) about 70 years ago. This is almost a pre-colonial
relic of the system that prevailed in the coastal district of Uttara Kannada (formerly known as
North Kanara). This is also a very good example of how government apathy, lack of support and
negative intervention can gradually discourage and lead to the degeneration of a well-functioning
community initiative.
Halkar village is situated towards the centre of the west coast of Uttara Kannada district (which lies
between 13° 55’ and 15° 31’ north latitude and 74° 09’ and 75° 10’ east longitude) in Karnataka.
The village is on the banks of the estuary of the Aghanashini River. Halkar lies on the outskirts of
Kumta town, with an area of about 200 ha, of which about 60 ha are submerged in the backwaters.
The lands all around the backwaters have rich plantations of coconut palms, mango, jackfruit,
banana and areca nut. The forest landscape is of semi-stunted type. The total forest area is 89 ha.
The forest trees seldom exceed 10 m in height. The number of trees was not more than 100 per ha
before the 1990s. However, plantation of fast-growing exotics in the gaps, which the forest had in
plenty, has considerably increased the tree population. The species planted are mostly Australian
acacia and casuarina. Cashew trees have also been raised in small patches, expecting to bear the
nuts in the near future. The village is able to meet its regular requirements of fuel, leaf manure
and minor timber on a sustainable basis from the community forest.
Notable among the evergreen trees are two species of blackberries or neeilu, andamurugila,
kokum, surugi, halchary and bokalu. Amongst the leaf-shedding trees there are kavala, gojjalu
and honagalu. Several herbs and climbers are found in the forest, including notable medicinal
plants like agnishikha and satavari. The few mangrove trees left in the gajni (estuarine rice lands)
are uppati, ipati and kandale.
Among the fauna, jackals are common and their number has increased since the raising of the
exotic trees. Other species that are found here are hyena, black-naped hare, Hanuman langur, wild
boar and barking deer. Around 50 years ago, panthers occasionally used to come down from the
Western Ghat forests into this forest. Of the many birds found in the forest are herons, kites, red-
wattled lapwing, jungle fowl, spotted dove, rose-ringed parakeet, oriole, cuckoo, kingfishers, tree-
pie, coppersmith barbet, Indian peafowl, drongos, warblers, bee eaters, etc. Most of the estuarine
birds like black-crowned night heron, ruddy shelduck, common teal, greater spotted eagle, grey
plover, European golden plover, Kentish plover, lesser sand plover, whimbrel, redshank, marsh
sandpiper, whiskered tern, pied avocet and rosy starling are found in the Aghanashini backwaters.
The backwater marshes are excellent breeding grounds for fishes, prawns, bivalves, crabs and
various crustaceans. The villagers here normally do not hunt. Some outsiders occasionally hunt for
hares. The birds of this forest do not face any major threat.
According to the 1991 census, Halkar had a population of 1016, with 177 households. Halkar has
a multi-caste Hindu society, who live in harmony despite their social hierarchy. Agriculture is one
of the main occupations of the villagers. As a result of the abolition of landlordism, in the 1970s the
patgars, who were traditional tenant farmers, became the owners of most of the rice fields, each of
them owning approximately one hectare or less. The able-bodied people move out seasonally into
case studies - karnataka

the interiors of the district, after the planting of rice in the gajnis,1 to work in the arecanut gardens
of the havik brahmins2. However, nowadays many members of these agricultural families pursue
other education-based professions like banking, teaching.

316
 Karnataka 317

The gunagas or kumbhars are traditionally potters. They also officiate as priests for the folk
deities of the village. Barring a few families, the rest of them have diversified into business,
transportation and other vocations. The Madivals or traditional washermen have also diversified
into other professions. There is an outflow of the younger generation towards urban centres for
business activities. Earlier the Mukris were hunter-gatherers and agricultural labourers who yet
continue to be on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder.
Most villagers grow vegetables and various tubers for subsistence and some trade. Laterite
bricks (which are quarried from the forest) and forest produce provide a major source of income
to the village forest panchayats.
Sacred groves dedicated to folk deities were a characteristic of Halkar till recent times. The
Mother Goddess of the village (Choudamma) was associated with a grove till about 25 years ago,
which has now been replaced with a shrine.

Legal status of land and resources

Legally the forest of Halkar is under the jurisdiction of the forest department, but pursuant to the
provisions of the Indian Forest Act of 1927, a village forest panchayats was constituted in Halkar
in 1930. The village forest panchayat system gives virtual control over the forest to the village
community, although the land is still legally under the forest department.

Overall administrative profile

Halkar village is in Kumta, one of the 11 talukas of Uttara Kannada district. The head of the
taluka is the tahsildar. The Deputy Commissioner is the highest official government rank in Uttara
Kannada district. Halkar village is a part of Holanagadde Panchayat3, which is responsible for
public works such as roads and supply of drinking water, in addition to running of schools, health
care systems, etc.

Towards community conservation

Prior to the British arrival, in the early 19th century, the forests of Uttara Kannada were mostly
managed by the village communities.4 Most villages had large sacred groves of similar landscape,
known as kans, covering several hectares in area. Tree cutting was a taboo inside the kans, but
gathering of non-timber forest produce such as black pepper, fruits, seeds, palm toddy, etc. was
not a violation. The kadu or ordinary forest was used by the people to meet their biomass needs
such as fuel, leaf manure, poles, timber, etc. The hakkalu or kumri were shifting cultivation areas,
where during the fallow period the forest would regenerate. The bena or grazing areas were
maintained as grasslands by setting them on fire periodically to destroy woody growth.5
In 1805, during British rule, the new rulers laid claim over the forests of the Western Ghats, by
classifying them as reserved exclusively for the state. By the end of the 19th century most of the sacred
kans, secondary forests, shifting cultivation areas and even the savannaised areas in the vicinity
of villages and towns had been notified as the state-reserved forests of Uttara Kannada. However,
heeding the persistent demand for privileges
in the forest by the villagers, especially for leaf
manure, fuel and grazing of cattle, the British
allotted the much-degraded forests or minor
forests and savannas to meet peoples’ needs.
The Bombay Government made a provision
case studies - karnataka

in its forest policy for the formal creation of

village forest panchayat (VFP). This was done
under the provisions of the Indian Forest
Act, 1927. Under the provisions of this Act,
panchayats or councils were mandated to elect
representatives of the villagers. Subsequently,
by 1930, nine VFPs were formed in the Kumta
forest range, covering 11 villages, and a total
Halkar wetland and forest Photo: MD Subhash Chandra
area of 1814 ha. The Halkar VFP was one of
6
them.
The formal institutional structure and bye-laws were provided by the Government of Bombay.
The VFP has a General Body (GB). Of the 206 households known to exist in Halkar today, 186
318 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

households are members, represented by individuals above 18 years who legally possess the rights
to the property. The eligibility criteria for membership are that the family should have resided in
the village for minimum of 10 years, should own cattle and actively participate in VFP activities.
The GB of the VFP has an elected managing body (MB) consisting of nine members. The MB
representatives belong proportionately to the various caste groups, of which two members each
are from the harikanta (fisherman), patgar (estuarine farmer) and gunaga (potter) castes, one
each from the brahmins and harijans (a collective term for low-caste Hindus) and one member from
a general category, by popular choice. Amongst these members one would be elected as chairman,
and another as vice-chairman. A secretary is appointed to look after the daily administration of the
VFP, whose services are on payment of a modest honorarium. A watchman is also appointed from
among the villagers, whose services are also paid payment. The democratic element means that
the VHP is accessible to all the villagers, irrespective of the caste to which they belong.
The elections of the MB of the VFP are conducted once in three years, under the supervision
of the tahsildar. Each caste group elects its representatives separately and the general category
representative is elected collectively by all villagers. There is no gender bias against women
contesting and participating in the VFP, although there seem to have been no instances of women
contestants so far. The MB meetings are held on every second Sunday of the month, while the GB
meetings are held once in six months, and at any other time during any important contingencies.
The accounts of the VFP are audited every year by the tahsildar.
Halkar has a democratic system of resource sharing, which includes the following features:
1. Each bonafide household is issued a ‘pass’ every year by the VFC for a fee of Rs 15.
2. Only one member from each pass-holding household is allowed to gather fallen leaves for
manure and dry wood as fuel.
3. A pass-holder may collect not more than one headload of branches (dead and fallen or dead
branches broken by hand) from the forest towards fuel purposes.
4. The fallen leaves for fuel or manure may be collected only during the dry season.
5. The quota for each household is limited to a headload of 25-30 kg a day.
6. Green twigs for manure purposes may be collected only from bushes during the rainy season.
7. Wild berries and medicinal plants for their own use may be freely collected.
As mentioned earlier, the villagers are provided laterite bricks quarried from the village at a
concession. The dead trees are auctioned amongst the villagers only, and one family can bid for
only one tree, creating a scope for participation of the poorer people. The plantation species like
acacia and casuarina are cut by the VFC itself and sold to needy households at prices lower than
the market rates. The village community is well aware of the limited resource provided to them
under their control. Those in need of more than the required quotas of plant biomass go to other
forests several kilometres away. Due to conservation efforts, the forest of Halkar is reasonably well
stocked to meet the villagers demands for leaf manure and fuel, thereby eliminating any resource
depletion of other forests.

Box 1
Traditional estuarine farming and sustainable system of fishing
Most traditional agriculture in Halkar and other estuarine villages consisted of rice cultivation
in the shallow parts of estuaries called gajnis. The process of rice cultivation in these gajnis
was due to the collective efforts of a large number of farmers. The patgars took the leadership
in the building and repairs of embankments, control of water flow, and all other agricultural
operations. They showed concern and initiative in planting mangrove trees along these earthen
dams. The entanglement of the aerial roots of the mangroves prevented erosion of the dams.
The fishermen also believe that the presence of mangroves is a major factor for larger production
of fish in the estuaries, as the mangroves increase nutrient supply. During the tides, saltwater
finds a way in and out of the gajnis through a network of natural drainage channels called
kodis. Rice cultivation in the estuarine rice fields does not require manuring or ploughing. On
the other hand, manure obtained from cattle and leaves collected from the forest are added to
the normal rice fields called gadde.
When earthen dams were made, the flow in the kodis was controlled through several sluice
gates, which facilitated thorough drainage of the gajnis. During the pre-monsoon weeks,
 Karnataka 319

towards the end of May, the gates were closed after the saltwater was drained. Subsequent
to the torrential rains of June and July, these gajnis would be refilled and the salt-tolerant
kagga rice was raised. Following the harvest of rice, usually in November, free flow of tidal
waters was permitted in the kodis through the sluice gates. This permitted fishing activities of
fishermen of the village in these gajnis. Customarily, only 3–4 families would practice fishing
in a kodi and by way of mutual understanding never violated the kodi borderlines. They fitted
nets called gantivale towards the mouth of the kodi, to trap fish that would be going out of the
gajni at low tide. They also used a kind of scooping net called gorubale to fish inside the kodis
at any time of the year, since the kodis were not planted with rice due to their depth and strong
currents of water. Two people held the gorubale and went against the flow. Since the net stood
a few inches above the soil, the fishing exercise would not exhaust the fish stock. The villagers
adopted a system of sustainable fishing.
Fishing was restricted to the fishermen except for patgars and mukris who occasionally caught
fish for personal family consumption. Patgars made basket-like devices of bamboo strips that
were used for fishing, unlike the harikantas, who lacked the expertise in making them. The
Harikantas used nets, which had larger mesh than the ones used nowadays, thereby allowing
smaller fish, especially juveniles, to escape. The local community management system of the
estuary never encouraged exhaustive fishing. The practice of planting mangroves, upkeep of
mangrove sacred groves, and earthen building (rather than stone and dykes as used today)
minimised the human impact on the estuarine ecosystems, ensuring sustainable use.

Monitoring and evaluation

The Halkar village community regularly monitors the functioning of the VFP with regard to account
maintenance and responsible performance by the office bearers. Being an officially constituted
body, the government has a vital role to play in the matters of the VFP functioning that may exceed
beyond its authority. A regular event is a tree-planting ceremony held on 15 August every year,
when the entire village community assembles in the forest and each family plants one tree.

Constraints and opportunities

Changes perceived in the habitat
During the early 1970s, under the Kharland (gajni) Development Scheme of the Karnataka
Government, a series of permanent dykes were built of stone, intended to protect the gajni
fields from salt water inundation. Once the gajnis were being protected by permanent dykes, the
farmers felt no need to plant mangroves, which were a prerequisite for protection of the earlier
earthworks. As a result, the existing mangrove flora suffered substantially, impoverishing the
estuarine ecosystem of the Aghanashini on the whole.
Although the dykes were built to protect the rice fields from saltwater inundation, very soon
outside forces entered the backwaters of the Aghanashini with tumultuous effects on the ecosystem,
economy and social harmony among the people. Soon after the building of dykes, under the
persuasion of outside fishing contractors, the farmers started storing the tidal waters in the gajnis
in the post-harvest period for growing fish, mainly prawns, which fetched good prices in the
international market. The estuarine fishing community was victimized due to such a development.
There were restrictions imposed on them for fishing in the gajnis, sometimes forcefully. The only
time they could now fish unrestricted was during the first few weeks of monsoon rains, when the
contract period for fishing expired. Harikanta fishermen, having lost their source of subsistence,
started moving out to seek employment in the more organised and mechanised sea-fishing sector
case studies - karnataka

in places as far as Mangalore, Cochin, Ratnagiri and Goa. The plight of their womenfolk, who used
to sell fish, became more serious. They were compelled to purchase fish from markets and sell
them for a small profit in the villages. There was a marked change in the fishing techniques as well.
The traditional nets (goruvale and gantivale) were replaced by hand-held trawl nets, with small
meshes, made to scoop the water of the kodis flush with the bottom, giving no room for fish to
escape. Even patgars, who earlier did not use fishing nets, started using these trawl nets.
Early in the 1990s, the forest department planted fast-growing exotics, mainly Australian acacia
and casuarina in about 30 hectares on the banks under the Wasteland Development Scheme of
the Government of India. In 1997-8, the department also planted about 10,000 saplings of cashew
and about 1000 saplings of teak. This trend of plantations led to suppressed growth of many other
species that were growing earlier. These fast-growing exotics have of late provided a quick solution
to villagers requirements of fuel and leaf manure.
320 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Government interference
In case of any threat to the forest, the entire village is alerted and an emergency GB is convened.
One such instance occurred in the early 1990s when the state government allotted about six
hectares of the village forest to the Konkan Railway Corporation for laying down the west-coast
railway line, without consulting the VFP. The villagers were helpless to resist this mega-project,
but they unanimously opposed the entry of a private contractor for clearing the forest along the
rail alignment. The Railway Department was forced to give in to the villagers’ protest and they
handed over the clearance of the trees to the villagers by coupling it with paying service charges.
This wood was then sold to the villagers at nominal rates by the VFP.
Another instance occurred in the 1970s. After the reserved forests under the control of the state
government were degraded because of excessive extraction, the government gave permission for
industrial logging in the Muroor Kallabe forest. This forest was one of the 9 well-established VFPs
during that period. The protests from the villagers were countered by the Government Order to
surrender control of all forest panchayats to the state, with which seven of the nine VFPs complied.
It took a 10-year-long legal battle by Halkar & Muroor Kallabbe to receive justice. However, this
legal battle demoralized the villagers to a great extent and the efficiency of the village management
system went down significantly.
Administrative interference
Since then administrative interference has carried on in different forms. According to the
provisions of the law, one of the tahsildar’s duties is to monitor the financial accounts of the
VFP. For the last two years the tahsildar has ordered auditing of accounts by the government
auditors. The conservation efforts by the villagers are based on informal mutual understandings.
The procedure of government auditing has challenged the faith in the traditional system of the
villagers. Moreover they feel that the audit fee being levied on the VFC is quite high. The villagers
feel that there is no need for the government to conduct audits, since the VHP has not utilised any
government money.
Changing aspirations
With the passage of time, economic perspectives matter more than the ecosystem. The rise in
prawn culturing has led to the decline of the estuarine ecosystem, also affecting the total number
of mangroves. Natural regeneration is suffering due to exotic trees being raised. The many sacred
groves once embedded in the village forest have been demarcated and given away to temples and
shrines.
The younger generation are not active participants towards conservation efforts, as they are
unaware of the forest ecosystem functioning. The reasons may be the geographic isolation of
Halkar forest, the denudation and watery environment around and the high density of population

Conclusion
The VFP is finding it difficult to cope up with the exacting demands from the state bureaucracy,
which needs legal knowledge and administrative skill of a formal type, which the villagers often
lack. Earlier villagers were apprehensive about the plantations of fast-growing exotic trees. The
availability of fuel, leaf manure and minor timber increased substantially, reducing the villagers’
apprehensions. No ecological consultation is easily available for the villagers. The ecosystem is
weakening and the soil is impoverished and eroded. Additionally, the villagers are unable to protect
the plants from the cattle and goats, which forage freely.
Another major drawback of the VFP is that there is no gender equity in its administration. In
Halkar, most households are registered with the names of men as their heads. Therefore men
have outnumbered women in the General Body of VFC as members. The prerequisite for women
contestants for the MB is that they have to be the members of the General Body. Since most of the
resource collectors are women and not men, the VFC needs to amend its bye-laws to give more
gender equity in its affairs.
During the last few years, however, several NGOs have visited Halkar to study the system of
forest management. NGOs like OXFAM and Vikasat have rendered some help to Halkar villagers
to overcome administrative crises, and also conducted short training programmes for VFP
members.
 Karnataka 321

Recommendations for the future

• The VFC has to create a greater scope for women’s participation.
• The VFC should be assisted from time to time by the forest department and other relevant
institutions with regard to the choice of species, especially indigenous ones.
• The species that are chosen should not only meet diverse kinds of biomass requirements of the
people but should also render ecosystem services, such as water and soil conservation, and
should also sustain wildlife.
• Since most of India lives in the villages, the government should pay greater attention to uplifting
the village life. There can be small investments, which are but a fraction of the amount being
spent to develop cities. Investments for forest improvement or mangrove vegetation are an
effective source of providing long-term returns.

This case study has been written by M.D. Subhash Chandran in 2001

For more details contact:

M.D. Subhash Chandran
Department of Botany,
A.V. Baliga College,
Kumta 581343,
Uttara Kannada, Karnataka, India
E-mail: mdschandra@yahoo.com

Endnotes
1
Estuarine rice fields where the farmers grow kagga rice which is tolerant to salinity.
2
Panchayat is a system of local self-government for groups of villages consisting of elected representatives of the
people.
3
F. Buchanan, Journey through the Northern Parts of Kanara (1801-2), vol.2 (Madras, Higginbothams, 1870).
4
M.D.S. Chandran and M. Gadgil, ‘State forestry and decline of food resources in the tropical forests of Uttara
Kannada, southern India’, in: Hladik et al. (eds), Tropical Forests, People and Food: Biocultural Interactions and
Applications to Development. MAB Series, vol. 15 (Paris, Parthenon, 1993), pp. 733-44.
5
Chandran and Gadgil. 1993. (As above).

case studies - karnataka

Kerala
Kerala: Community conservation in god’s own
country
Roshni Kutty

Author’s note
In the chapter that follows, I attempt to showcase various shades of community conservation
within the context of Kerala’s highly literate and politically active society. The discussions that follow
indicate that Kerala’s traditional-emotional concern for conservation (represented by the existence
of sacred groves) and nature in general has been replaced by a more rationalistic attitude towards
nature, especially over the last two decades.

1. Background
1.1. Geographic background
The modern state of Kerala (formed in 1956 through the amalgamation of the kingdoms of
Malabar, Kochi and Travancore) is a narrow strip of land between 8o18’N and 12o48’N latitude and
74o52’E and 77o24’E longitude, 38,855 sq km in area, and with a coastline of 576 km.
The state is blessed with a climate that provides for luxuriant vegetative growth. Normal expected
rainfall is 2718.6mm annually.1 Water has till recently not been a scarcity item, unlike in other
states of India, thanks to the monsoons.
There are 41 west-flowing rivers in the state, in addition to three east-flowing rivers, which
are tributaries of the Kaveri. Only four2 exceed 100 km in length. Several places of historical and
cultural importance are linked to the river systems, indicating the role these water sources played
in influencing the historical and cultural development of the state. Some have even influenced
political and military developments: Cochin rose in importance as a commercial port only after
the 1341 floods in the Periyar choked the Cranganore harbor. Floods in the same river in 1789
prevented the ruler Tipu Sultan from continuing his aggressive advance into Travancore.3
The territory of the state may be broadly divided into three natural divisions: (1) a narrow,
alluvial coastland extending only a few miles from the sea and mostly confined to the lower two-
thirds of the coastline, (2) a midland consisting of low lateritic plateaus and foothills between 200
and 600 feet, covered with grass and scrub, and (3) the highlands.4
The Western Ghats form an almost unbroken wall guarding the state’s eastern border. Ranging
from 3,000-8,841 ft above sea level, the Ghats constitute the highlands of Kerala. At 8,841 ft
above msl, the Anamundi Peak in Kottayam District represents the highest point in India
south of the Himalayas. Mostly covered by thick forests, the upper ranges in the Ghats
are also dotted with extensive plantations of tea and cardamom, while pepper, rubber,
ginger and turmeric flourish on the lower slopes.5 The forests are rich in non-wood
forest produce, used in myriad ways by local people, including very substantially in
the preparation of ayurvedic medicines.6
state chapter - kerala

Interspersed with plantations, the lowlands stretch along the coastal plains of the
western side of the state. The soil in this region is sandy. Coconut trees grow luxuriantly
in the area, dominating the landscape. Paddy is extensively cultivated here.
Sandwiched between the lowlands and highlands, the midlands are characterized by
lateritic soils and intermittent rolling hills that lead to the forest-clad uplands. The
midlands are extensively cultivated, with paddy, tapioca, spices and cashewnut being
the most important crops.
Though cleared areas in Kerala regenerate more quickly than other, drier eco-
regions in the country, there are several areas in the state that are increasingly
experiencing landslides, acute drinking water shortages and resource erosion.
325
326 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

1.2. Socio-economic and political profiles in the context of

conservation
With a population of 31.8 million, Kerala, with 818 persons per sq km, is the second most densely
populated state in the country.7 It is India’s most literate state with a literacy of nearly 90 per cent.
The people of Kerala are politically highly motivated.
Before independence, Kerala was divided into three areas: Travancore, Kochi and Malabar. The
northern part of Kerala was known as Malabar,8 which was directly under the British forming part of
the Madras Presidency. In 1792 Malabar was ceded to the British by Mysore while the Cochin Raja
and the Travancore Raja, in 1791 and 1805 respectively, signed a treaty with the British accepting
British protection. In 1949 Travancore and Kochi were integrated to form the Travancore-Kochi
state. All three areas were amalgamated to form the state of Kerala in 1956.9
The special features of the political life of Kerala are a high level of political consciousness,
influence of caste and religion on the political system, presence of the Communist parties, and
coalition politics. An understanding of these features will help us to understand the political cultures
of the local communities. High literacy rates, reading habits, exposure to the media, the influence
of progressive forces, and student organisations affiliated to political parties functioning from high
school to the universities are some of the reasons for Malayalees being a highly politically aware
community.10
The egalitarian policies of the erstwhile Rajahs of Travancore-Cochin, which were continued by
democratically elected governments, ensured that basic necessities such as food, water, health
care, housing and education have always been provided to the people. The average Malayali is
thus not as hard hit by the lack of basic amenities as people in other states.11
One of the biggest contributing factors to the average Malayali’s lack of concern for nature is
high population pressure on a small land mass. Over time, this has resulted in few truly wilderness
areas that remain for conservation. Kerala has the highest average population density in the
country: where there is no land to cultivate or put up a shelter, people are hardly bothered about
conservation issues.
Two demographic processes have had major impacts on present socio-economic conditions in
the state: (i) the peasant migrations that began in the mid-1920s, which saw large influxes of
settlers from Travancore into Malabar, and (ii) the emigration of large workforces to the Gulf
countries with substantial return of income, which resulted in major improvements in the living
conditions of an English-educated middle class. Both these factors have contributed to taking
the Malayalis far away from their Dravidian roots. With reducing dependence on agriculture, the
common person’s relationship with the natural environment has diminished. Peasant migration
that began in the 1920s came to an end by the 1970s, when practically the entire area of cultivable
wastelands was occupied by peasant farmers from Travancore for the purpose of extending cash-
crop cultivation in Malabar. The peasants who moved were mainly Syrian Christians from the
midland region of the northern half of Travancore. The cultivable wastelands were all owned by
the jenmis (landlords). However, migrants could lease lands owned by the landlords, but only on
terms and conditions of tenancy not favourable to them. The Kerala Land Reforms Act of 1963 and
its subsequent amendments conferred absolute ownership on the tenants on payment of a nominal
sum as compensation to the landlords. Thus the land reforms encouraged peasant migration.12
As Dr. S. Sankar from Kerala Forest Research Institute (KFRI) puts it (with a distinctly male
perspective), ‘The average Malayali’s concern does not stop merely at the issue of survival. He has
to have his wife, house and his gold too.’ The basic needs are not enough to satisfy the people,
and aspirations for a better and more ‘convenient’ lifestyle are growing. Apart from the above-
mentioned migratory processes, the land reforms implemented by the Communist government in
the 1950s have also had a major role in changing the socio-economic status of the people. The
land to the tiller Act, as it is commonly referred to, has been enacted in nearly
every state in India. However, in Kerala its meaningful implementation
has taken place, due to the Communist government in power at that
time. The land redistribution among the tiller classes uplifted them
economically as well as socially. No more were they dependent on
doles handed out to them by the upper-caste landlords. The lower
castes, who formed a majority of the working class, were now aware
of their rights and had learnt to get them too.
Distinctions between urban and rural areas in Kerala are not so
clearly demarcated any longer. It may, in fact, be appropriate to say
that Kerala’s populace inhabits only urban and semi-urban areas.
 Kerala 327

The Pre-investment Survey of Forest Resources estimated forest loss in Kerala

at 3,450 sq km between 1940 and 1970, almost 30 per cent (1,020 sq km) of
which was lost between 1960 and 1970 alone.13 Between 1905 and 1965, the
forest loss in Kerala was 6,400 sq km. The National Remote Sensing Agency
reported that the forest loss in Kerala was of the magnitude of 1,200 sq
km per year between 1972-75 and 1980-82. Forest cover in the state in
2003 was estimated at 15,577 sq km (40 per cent of the state’s area).14
Encroachment of the forests for agricultural purposes is stated to be one of
the main reasons for Kerala’s shrinking forests.

2. A Brief history of administrative control

over land and resources
2.1. Land revenue systems
Private ownership of land has been recorded in Kerala long before the Sangam
age.15 Land was always owned either by an individual, an unpartitioned family or
a temple. There was no land which belonged to the desam or tara (the village
or the area inhabited by a particular community). Until the Mysorean invasion in
the mid-18th century, no land revenue was collected in Kerala. All the chieftains,
from the ruler (naduvazhi) to the desavazhi (village head) possessed their own
landed properties, which were either cultivated by them through their slaves or leased to kudiyans
(tenants). This state of affairs prevailed in Kerala in the beginning of the 19th century when the
British had begun to establish their political authority over the land.16
The Chola-Chera17 war of the 11th century AD led to the total mobilization of the resources of
the state. A new situation arose in which the Namboothiris (Malayali Brahmins) came to acquire a
dominant position in economic and social life. Since large sections of the society were preoccupied
with the conduct of the war, those Namboothiris who were the trustees of the temples mismanaged
the temple properties and misappropriated for themselves all their revenue. During this time it
also happened that several ordinary tenants who owned lands and properties transferred them in
toto to the Brahmins and the temples. They did so because the lands and properties so transferred
came to be regarded as devaswoms and brahmaswoms (temple trusts) and enjoyed freedom from
devastation by the enemy forces in times of war as well as exemption from the payment of tax to
the state. In the above circumstances, the Namboothiri Brahmins came to acquire the status of
wealthy and powerful landlords or jenmis.18
The social awakening among all classes of people in Kerala, the spread of democratic and egalitarian
ideas, the increasing pace of industrialisation, the rural to urban influx and the improvement in the
level of literacy and educational standards are all factors which hastened the pace of social change
in Kerala.19 The growing consciousness of peasants or tillers that the land belonged to them and
that the jenmi, who was more of an absentee landlord, was denying them the fruits of labour led to
the rise of agrarian movements aimed at land reform. The result was that successive governments
in Kerala have given top priority to land legislation with a view to conferring rights on the tenant.
The Jenmi system has now disappeared and a new class of peasant proprietors with a stake
in the land has come into existence. This has transformed the socio-economic scene in Kerala
beyond recognition.20 Prior to the 18th century, the fixed rules that governed relationships between
the jenmi and different classes of tenants also directed patterns of cultivation, development and
resource extraction.

2.2. Management of forest resources by the state21

state chapter - kerala

The evolution of forest management by the state in Kerala began with conservation by default,
for want of options due to accessibility and technological and market limitations in the state’s
abundant forests. With time, and as limitations were overcome, Kerala’s forests were extensively
modified. Different phases in Kerala’s forest management history (elaborated below) can be briefly
summarized as the rise of forestry from the 1840s to the 1940s, turbulence and change from the
1930s to the 1980s and the ascent of conservation from the 1980s onwards.
The spice trade was an important source of government revenue in the kingdoms of Kerala long
before the arrival of the first European merchant ships in 1498. Spices were collected from forests,
which covered the entire region beyond the coastal and riverside settlements.
328 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Prior to British rule, the forests belonged to one jenmi (landlord) or the other. Rivalry between
European powers over Asian trade domination led to their insistence on exclusive contracts for
pepper in the form of treaties with the rulers on the Kerala coast. Several such items important in
trade, including teak, gradually became state monopolies.
Rise of Forestry phase (1840-1940): Teak plantations as a forestry enterprise were introduced
in the 1840s by the British, and marked a shift from purely extractive and regulatory forestry to a
phase of resource development. The Nilambur22 teak plantations started in 1840 paved the way for
the cultivation of teak in other forests of the state.23 Forestry was organized on commercial lines
with sustained yields as the central principle of management, primarily to supply sleepers and fuel
for the railways. The German tradition of forest management based on meticulous working plans
and rigorous implementation of regulatory prescriptions was followed. The plans were suspended
in 1939 to meet the timber and firewood demands of the Second World War. Many plywood
industries were established in Kerala during this period.
Turbulence and Change Phase (1930- 1980): Commitments to supply forest produce as raw
materials to industries in the post-independence period have continued to disregard prescriptions
of working plans in force. The state witnessed intensive mechanical logging operations—in the
guise of selective felling—in response to the post-Second World War boom in the timber market.
In short, the post-independence period witnessed a demand for timber that far exceeded supply
on a sustained yield basis.
Ascent of Conservation Phase (Post-1980): The creation of a wildlife wing in 1993, an increase
in area and number of protected areas, and large investments in research all marked the period
of change in forest management. Responding to criticism by conservationists, the expansion of
eucalyptus plantations was halted in Kerala in 1984. Clear-felling of plantations at rotation age was
stopped in 1985 in wildlife sanctuaries. Even selective felling, which is not controlled by the Forest
Conservation Act, was abandoned in Kerala in 1987 due to pressure from conservation groups in
the state. Half of Kerala’s protected areas were notified in the 1980s, marking the beginning of the
‘Ascent of Conservation’ phase.

2.3. Rights of forest-based communities

Pre-independence, the tribals who inhabited the forested frontier areas of Malabar, Cochin and
Travancore were left mostly undisturbed. During British rule, tribals were required to hand over
valuable items such as ivory and collect minor forest produce for depots of the state or its contractors.
The state and the forest department considered them as labour reserves in inhospitable areas and
also as valuable informants on poaching and smuggling of forest produce. Developments in the
timber market and the war demand brought about changes in the intensity of timber extraction,
such that the earlier privileges of tribals were reduced to concessions.
Post-independence government policy favoured the grant of food production leases in forests to
non–tribals. Subsequently, large-scale immigration of people from the plains to the hills reduced
the tribals almost to the status of landless persons.24 A sizeable chunk of arable land, which
the tribals had used for shifting cultivation, was encroached upon, depriving them of their only
means of subsistence. The post-Second World War ‘grow more food’ campaign initiated by the
government contributed considerably to this migration to the Malabar region. Land reforms failed
to yield any benefits to the adivasis. When tenancy and landlordism were abolished in 1970, the
tenants were granted occupancy rights; but in the adivasi belts, this was twisted, with the settler
farmers acquiring the land rights in their garb of ‘tenants’ and the adivasis losing lands from their
position as ‘landlords’!25
Restoring their rights and lands to tribals would involve disturbing the settlers and planters,
who are not only a powerful political force but also belong to the same non-tribal category as
most politicians and bureaucrats (see also Section 2.5). An attempt at reinstating their rights
was carried out by the state government through the Kerala Hillmen Rules 1964, but the Kerala
High Court struck down the rules as being beyond the purview of the state government. This
further encouraged an exodus of non-tribals into tribal areas. Although the state government
issued directions for eviction of non-tribals from tribal settlements, these
orders have not been implemented. Another legislation yet to be
implemented is the Kerala Scheduled Tribes (Restriction of Transfer
of Lands and Restoration of Alienated lands) Act 1975 (KSTA
1975). Under this act, all transactions of tribal lands during
the period 1960-1982 were to be held invalid and the lands
restored to the original owners who would be required to pay
a sum equal to the total of the amount received, if any, as
 Kerala 329

consideration for the transaction and the amount spent by the occupier
of the land before the commencement of the act as compensation.
The government would advance a sum as a loan to the beneficiary,
which was to be repaid in 20 years. Transfer of lands from tribal to
non-tribals was also prohibited from 1982.26 The KSTA 1975 was the
product of a political compulsion to appease and wean the adivasis
away from the ‘Naxalites’, who were active during the earlier period
when the act was passed. Two decades later, the mainstream political
parties had established their presence amongst the tribals under the
organizational control of the immigrants. State repression and a fast-
expanding market for cash crops and the plantation economy, along with
the fact that adivasi lands were held by powerful economic interests, together
worked to weaken radical movements. The adivasis had meanwhile become a numerical minority
in their homelands.27 The political parties and the government did an about-turn from support of
the act to a total opposition to it. Thus came the 1996 amendment to the act which exempted the
lands encroached upon during the period 1960-86 and those that did not exceed a hectare from
the restoration drive. Yet another amendment in 1999 condoned encroachments of up to 5 acres
(2 ha). The new name of the bill read thus: the Kerala Restriction on Transfer and Restoration of
Lands to Scheduled Tribes, 1999. The word ‘alienated’—denoting lands captured by the settlers—
had been quietly dropped.28
The collection of minor forest produce has, however, been recently entrusted to tribal societies.
This programme initiated by the forest department in 2000 gives the tribal community direct
responsibility in protecting forests.29

2.4. Land use and changes of terrestrial habitat and resource use
Forests covered roughly half the geographic area of the state at the beginning of the 20th
century and remained fairly intact for more than half a century.
Although plantations were developed in the hills, they were far removed from the settlements;
and after the coffee blight (during 1868–80), planters were cautious in taking up plantations.
There was no perceptible deforestation. Due to inaccessibility and strict implementation of rules
regarding trespass into reserved forests prior to the Second World War, very few people from
other areas visited the forests. Therefore, it is not surprising to expect that people believed that
forests extended indefinitely, and, as a corollary, that there was no harm in clearing some for any
immediate purpose.
The peasant migration that began in the early 1920s was a unique phenomenon in Kerala.
Streams of peasant farmers moving from Travancore to Malabar had by the 1970s occupied
practically all of the cultivable lands in North Kerala. The subsistence peasants were soon converted
into a class of ‘forward’-looking commercial farmers.30 Higher population density concentrated on
the coast coupled with a small land mass was not favourable for comfortable living conditions
in south Kerala. At the same time north Kerala (the Malabar region) was relatively less densely
populated, having vast stretches of forest cover that were hardly exploited. This prompted the
more enterprising southerners to migrate to the northern parts and make a living on the hills,
mostly through plantation agriculture (rubber, tea, coconut, spices, and others).
Between 1940 and 1980, Kerala witnessed both spectacular population growth31 and major
administrative and political changes. The war had disrupted food supplies and the impact was
felt severely in the state, particularly in Travancore, which relied heavily on food imports. The
expansion of cultivated areas did not keep pace with the rate of population growth in the twentieth
century. There was a marked shift from subsistence farming towards the cultivation of cash crops
and plantations of export crops, mostly by the migrating peasants in the newly occupied areas.
state chapter - kerala

Responding to the famine, government32 policy began to encourage the expansion of cultivation in
forests. There was a steady stream of government programmes encouraging settlements in the
forests from the early 1940s through to the early 1970s, so it was inevitable that a spillover in
the nature of ‘encroachments’ would take place. These encroachments were quickly regularized as
political parties vied with each other to grant ownership rights to migrant farmers in the forests.33
This had severe impacts on the local tribal population (see section 2.4). Between 1952-73 Kerala lost
3,400 sq km of forest land for agriculture, road construction and irrigation and power facilities.34
A ‘colonisation’ programme followed the massive food production drive that was part of the
nationwide ‘Grow More Food Campaign’ in Travancore, and was aimed at pre-empting the possibility
of a claim by Madras State on the forests in the high ranges bordering Kerala and Tamil Nadu.35
330 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

During this campaign, extensive stretches of road margins and stream banks were released for
cultivation by migrant settlers.
Settlements in the hills became even more attractive with the eradication of malaria between
1948 and 1950. The development of roads built to facilitate timber extraction and the construction
of dams opened up hitherto inaccessible lands. The post-war boom in the prices of cash crops
further propelled the rush of migrant farmers into the forests. In Travancore and Cochin, what
remained of private forests were those left uncultivated within large estates of tea, coffee and
other cash crops.
In 1971, the state government decided to take over private forests, through the Kerala Private
Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act (KPFA), 1971, as part of its agrarian reforms. It must be
noted that while the objectives of the Madras Preservation of Private Forests Act (MPPFA), 1949,
was forest conservation, the KPFA sought to facilitate the conversion of forests to agriculture. The
annexing of private forests under this Act as a land reform measure enabled the government to
confiscate holdings without having to pay any compensation to the owners. Exemptions were,
however, permitted in case of lands used principally for cultivation of various plantation crops.
These exemptions had the effect of selectively penalizing forest-owners in Madras State, who,
having abided by the MPPFA and preserved the forest, now suffered confiscation, while those
who cleared the forest for agriculture/plantations were allowed to retain them!36 The frequent
regularization of encroachments in Reserved Forests also serves to reinforce this impression.
A new, decentralized approach to administration that encourages community involvement
(popularly referred to as the ‘People’s Plan’) introduced by the state government in 1995 has
gone a long way in helping local communities decide how they want to manage their natural
resources. However, even the decentralized mode of administration through the Panchayati Raj
and People’s Plan Programme has faced some criticism as the panchayat is seen to be nothing
but a unit of the political party with no actual people’s involvement. An interesting observation
by a community conservation researcher is that one needs to look at political interference in
reality as caste differentiation in the garb of modernism: whereas the Marxist party represents the
downtrodden section, the Congress party represents the slightly more well-off community.37 As our
subsequent discussions will show, this has led to the failure or dying out of conservation efforts. In
the case of sacred groves (the most common community conservation effort), party politics takes
on communal colours and the protection of a sacred grove is implied to be the responsibility of the
followers of the Hindu religion.

2.5 Marine resource use changes

The sea has been a permanent and decisive factor in the history of Kerala, which has 12,570
sq km of coastline. Fishery policy during the period 1956 to 1966 can be summarized as having
been based on the judicious exploitation of marine resources. During this phase increased fishing
effort was applied by the artisanal fisherfolk using their traditional non-mechanised craft and a
wide array of fishing gear and tackle. There was a rapid change from cotton to nylon nets. This
approach did not last long. By the mid-sixties the ‘modernization/growth-oriented’ model came to
be introduced in Kerala. The single most important factor responsible for this was the rising demand
for prawn in the international market. Fisheries development in Kerala soon became synonymous
with increasing prawn harvest and earning foreign exchange. This was spurred by factors such as
the enhanced growth of the US and Japanese economies and also the former’s loss of access to
supply from China. These demand-pull factors were outside the control of the local economy, and
it was also difficult to insulate the fishery resources from being harvested in response to these
factors. One can discern two phases in this timespan: a phase of steadily increasing harvests from
1956 to 1973, and a phase of stagnating or declining harvests from 1973 to 1985.
With the phenomenal rise in the number of small trawlers, the prawn harvest and export earnings
increased steadily. The earlier caste-bound nature of the fishery sector
ceased to be a barrier to entry. The main investors involved in the new
development model were non-fisherfolk. This trend continued till 1974.
The levels of overall fish and prawn harvest began to fall. By the end
of the 70s the marine fishery sector of the state was heading towards
an ecological crisis of overfishing.
When traditional technologies and the custom-bound organization
of the fish economy predominated, the common property nature of
the marine fish resource did not pose a major problem. Technical
barriers, such as the need to have fishery specific skills, and social
 Kerala 331

barriers, like fishing being the occupation of a lower caste, prevented free entry of capital and
persons from outside the traditional fishing communities. Traditional fishing technologies (nets,
tackle and the methods of fishing) were evolved to suit the particular ecological context of the fish.
Apart from these factors, the selective nature of fishing nets (different mesh-sizes for catching
specific species of fish) and the ‘passive’ nature of fishing operations (allowing fish to get entangled
in the net rather than pursuing or catching them by disturbing their milieu) ensured sustainable
fishing.
The introduction of mechanised boats and the perceived profit opportunities in prawn exporting
changed this scenario considerably. The mercantile capital class of Kerala took the initiative to
break these barriers. Free access to the sea made it easy for them to make a rapid entry since
mechanised boats could be operated without any license or registration at that time. There was
also no regulation limiting the ownership of fishing assets only to those who were active fishermen.
As a result, the post-1966 period witnessed an increase in both the influx of non-fisherfolk owners
of fishing assets as well as the number of mechanized trawlers. Modern fishing techniques such as
trawling (the method of scraping the sea bottom with a bell-shaped net to catch demersal fish) and
purse-seining (the method of quickly encircling whole shoals of pelagic fish) led to overfishing.
Population pressures on inshore waters also aggravated the situation. Given Kerala’s coastal sea
area of 12,570 sq km, the population density was about 6.4 fishermen per sq km, ensuring that on
the average each fisherman had 16 hectares of coastal commons to fish. By 1985 the population
increased by 65 per cent, reducing the average coastal commons per fisherman to 9 ha as against
30 ha for all of India.38

3. Origins of community conservation initiatives

Hemmed in by the Western Ghats on the one side and the Arabian Sea on the other, Kerala’s
geographic insulation considerably influenced the course of its history, allowing the development
of several social institutions unique to Kerala.39 Interestingly, like grazing lands in other states,
some agricultural lands in Kerala have historically been considered common property.40
Although the practice of conserving sections of natural forests as sacred groves, an age-old
wisdom, is common in Kerala, pro-active conservation attitudes are a more recent phenomenon
that arose in response to large-scale environmental degradation in the state. The beginnings
can be traced to the famous Silent Valley protest that began in 1973, and showed the world how
wilderness areas could be saved from harmful developmental projects by mass campaigns, purely
on environmental grounds.
Local communities, in the strict sense of the term are absent in Kerala (except in a few tribal
pockets in interior forests), a phenomenon attributed to the state’s geography and history.41 ‘The
villages in Kerala were loosely organized and there never has been a free village habitation area.
The ideal Malayali house is set in its own compound with their own bathing pool and well, vegetable
gardens, food-producing trees, small deity for daily worship and even cremation ground. These
dwellings were quite isolated, set off from neighbouring houses. Vendors make their rounds with
additional foods, cloth for daily use, cooking utensils etc. Hence there was hardly any need for the
Malayali42 to move out of his residential compounds to meet his daily requirements.’43
One of the main reasons for people to group together (thus forming a ‘community’) is water.
But common water sources were not required in Kerala as every household had its own well. Nor
did external threats such as wars require people to group together. In these situations, there was
little opportunity for individuals to have a non-familial primary group life, such as characterises the
nucleated village.44 Family-controlled areas thus attained great importance in Kerala45. The jenmi
system was thus the only space that allowed interactions between various castes and enabled
people to form loose communities.
state chapter - kerala

With the disappearance of the jenmi system, the gradual disintegration of the joint family and
with it various social arrangements that the jenmi had with his tenants were inevitable. Till a
couple of decades ago, the bonds that are essential to community conservation were absent in
Kerala, with the exception of strong socio-religious holds on sacred groves.
The Silent Valley movement triggered the birth of the environmental movement in Kerala and
led the state government to pass legislation for the protection of certain selected areas.46 The
movement not only created awareness of environmental concerns but also helped organize people
into groups that became vocal in opposing development trends which affected the environment
and communities adversely.
332 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

3.1. Community conservation efforts

In the sections that follow, we explore community conservation efforts along two basic divisions:
(i) conservation of forests including sacred groves, and (ii) conservation of marine and coastal
resources. Specific mention must also be made of commendable individual efforts at conservation,
which have brought about vast changes in their limited areas of work.

3.1.1. Sacred groves

Sacred groves (called kavus) and their associated ponds constitute a unique network of ecological
systems intertwined with the life and culture of the people of Kerala. Important factors that led to
the conservation of sacred groves include the strong belief of local people in the resident deity and
the beliefs based on folklore that surround each grove. Festivals celebrated are varied and unique
to the grove.
At the beginning of the 19th century there were more than 30,000 groves in Kerala.47 A recent
survey conducted by Induchoodan in 1996 indicated the presence of only 761 sacred groves of
which more than half (399 or 52.17 per cent) are less than 0.02 ha in extent. However, size alone
should not be considered a criterion for conservation, as protection is required not only to maintain
their high biological values but also to perpetuate cultural values unique to each sacred grove. The
size distribution of groves throughout the state is very variable: thus, though Kasargod District
has a larger number of groves (60), Kannur District with 54 groves has a larger area (100.28 ha)
under ‘sacred’ conservation.
The vegetation of sacred groves can be classified into two types: evergreen and moist deciduous.
Sacred groves, in the drier parts of the state’s moist deciduous vegetation, are mostly dry with
open canopies and poor plant diversity. The groves have very poor faunal diversity due to their
small extents of natural vegetation and the considerable biotic impacts of surrounding dense
populations.48
Ayyappan Kavus, dedicated to Lord Ayyappa, were the most common groves in Kerala in the
past. Some existing groves are Sarpam Kavu,49 dedicated to the snake gods, and Amman or
Bhagavathi Kavu, dedicated to the goddess Bhagavathi. The sacred groves of north Kerala are
mostly associated with goddesses, whereas those of south Kerala are associated mostly with snake
worship.
Historically controlled as family-owned properties, the eldest male inherited the grove and
shrine/temple and conducted the daily rituals of worship. Families unable to practice the kavu
rituals handed over control of the groves to organizations like Devaswom Boards50 and local temple
committees (Basha, in Ramakrishnan et al).51 All higher-caste families had their own groves. The
lower castes did not have any but were expected to adhere to the strict caste rules.
Once a common feature of every village and hamlet in ancient Kerala, the groves have been
gradually fragmented across different generations and now only small patches of the original
vegetation housing the shrine/temple exist. Some groves, though completely devoid of vegetation
(only the temples exist) are still referred to as kavus. In many of these cases, the grove was ‘freed’
from the power of God by a special ritual and the vegetation cleared for conversion to alternate
land uses.
Sacred groves remain a potent mechanism for conserving biodiversity. For example, Holigarna
beddomei, a tree endemic to the Western Ghats and uncommon in Kerala, now occurs only in some
of the midland sacred groves of north Kerala. Although present in large numbers in the Brahmagiri
Hills of Coorg District in South Karnataka, Holigarna is absent in the adjoining Reserve Forests
of Adoor, Muliyaar and Parappa in the Kasargode ranges of Kerala. That this species was once
abundant in the evergreen forests of the midlands and has now become threatened reveals the
extent to which anthropogenic disturbance is responsible for conversion of the vegetation from an
evergreen nature to a deciduous one.52 Research has also revealed the importance of these groves
as seed banks. Four new species of grasses have been recorded in the lateritic53 wastelands that
surround most of the groves in north Kerala. One of them, Lepidagathis keralensis (previously
identified as L. prostata) has medicinal properties.
Institutional structures in the conservation of sacred groves
The sacred groves of Kerala can be categorized being under one of three broad classes of
management: (i) by individual families, (ii) by groups of families and (iii) by statutory agencies.
More than 99 per cent of the groves are privately owned. These can be further grouped into four
sub-classes:
 Kerala 333
1. Family owned: Management is looked after by a single family (as in Mannarassala Kavu,
Alappuzha District) or managed by a group of families (as in Pambumekattumana Kavu, Thrissur
district).
2. Establishment owned: Dewaswom Boards or Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Trusts
(HR&CE) provide annual maintenance grants to temples situated in the groves. Most groves in
south Kerala are under Dewaswom Boards established by the government and many situated
in northern parts of the state are supported by HR&CE Trusts.
3. Community-owned: Certain communities own and manage the grove as common property
(Cheema Kavu, Kasargode district, where the Asari or carpenter community manages the
grove).
4. Local trust-owned: Local committees or trusts came into existence as a result of disintegration
of the families that originally owned the groves (Pramancheri Kavu, Kannur district is managed
by the Pramancheri Kavu Samrakshana Samiti). For example, in Aravanchal Kavu the breakdown
of the joint families or the taravadus led to nuclear households inheriting smaller properties. But
the awareness about the importance of green cover has made them come together to protect
an old sacred grove that had been left in disuse.
Constraints and opportunities for sacred grove conservation
The temples of the modern era that first appeared in Kerala ca. AD 750 marked the beginnings
of an erosion in the importance of Dravidian deities and their shrines. The fading out of cultural
associations with the groves is intricately linked to the fragmentation and disappearance of sacred
groves in Kerala.
State politics also played a role in this disintegration. Marxist uprisings of the 1940s, and
subsequent post-independence land reforms and redistributive policies of the democratically
elected Communist government led to more equitable land distribution, but also to an ascent
of atheism among the masses as proof of loyalty to Marxist theory, translating into a waning of
cultural and religious practices all across the state.
Most of the sarpam kavus (groves dedicated to the snake gods), under the control of joint
families and tharavadus,54 disappeared after the land to the tiller reforms were introduced in the
state. With the division of the groves under land reform schemes, the new owners converted parts
of the grove without the shrines to agricultural fields and home gardens. The sacred groves are
mostly forest patches in the midst of populated areas, and, with time, encroachment of the groves,
tree felling, fire and walking paths inside the groves became commonplace. Grazing of cattle,
collection of leaf litter and firewood, quarrying within the grove and domination of weeds coupled
with the disinterest of the temple administration towards the upkeep of the groves also contributed
to their destruction.55 One of the serious threats facing the sacred groves is the ‘Hinduisation or
Brahminisation’ of the groves. The origin of most of the groves comes from the need that the
community felt to protect forest patches for the future generations. And the presiding deities
for these groves are all of Dravidian origin. Conversion of these deities into ‘Hindu’ gods and the
subsequent temples constructed in their name within the grove has resulted in opening them
up for destruction. This is seen to be a tactic of the Brahmin caste to dominate over resources.
Temple construction ensures that where there was only an annual ritual to worship the grove
deity, it was now replaced with daily poojas that brought in more revenue for the priest and temple
authorities.56
The number of community efforts at conserving sacred groves rose with the return of religious
fervour among the masses in the 1990s, probably as a result of disillusionment with Communism
and the rise of right-wing Hindu political parties. The revival of community participation in the
conservation of sacred groves can also be attributed to increased awareness on the value of the
natural heritage and the importance of biodiversity.57 Where community members have fenced off
state chapter - kerala

remnants of a sacred grove on their own initiative, the groves have been revived, as in the case
of Chaama Kavu of Payyanoor Gram Panchayat, Kannur district. In Muthappanar Kavu, until 1998,
apart from eeyachembu tree, no undergrowth was left in the sacred grove. After the community
constructed a concrete wall around it, the grove now contains a diversity of vegetation.
Such recent efforts have been observed in groves under two kinds of management: (i) by temple
priests or karanavars58 and other respected community members, and (ii) by local committees
comprising community members of different castes and religions. In north Kerala, especially,
several of these local communities have sprung to action to conserve the fast disappearing groves.
The Aravanchal Shree Bhagavathi Kavu Committee represents one such community effort at
conserving sacred groves, which we present as a detailed case study (see Case Studies). This is
334 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

just one example from among several groves in North Kerala that are being protected by local
communities. A list of some community conserved sacred groves in Kerala is provided in Table 1.

Table 1: Community conservation efforts in sacred groves59

Name and Panchayat/Municipality, Area

Eco-region
location District (acres)
Iringole Kavu Travancore, Ernakulam -

Nakravanam Kavu Cheruvathoor, Kasargode 3 Midland

Aravanchal Kavu Peringom, Kannur 7 Midland

Mannarsala Kavu

Thavidissery Kavu Peringom, Kannur 50 Midland

Theyyottu Kavu Kangol-Aalapadambu, Kannur 60 Midland

Lowland/
Mookambika Kavu Karivelloor-Peralam, Kannur 6
Coastal
Lowland/
Chaama Kavu Payyanur 9
Coastal
Lowland/
Idayilakattu Kavu Valiyaparamba, Kasargode 16
Coastal

In response to these community efforts, in March 1996 the state government passed a scheme
for fencing all the sacred groves in the state. The responsibility of completing this task was given
to the Social Forestry Division of the State Forest Department with a budget of Rs 20 lakhs per
district. However, not a single grove has been fenced and the forest department has not even
replied to letters sent by the managers of various sacred groves in the state questioning the delay.
The forest department, on its part, realizes that it has first to resolve the community problems
vis-à-vis resource management, win over the faith of the people, and stress the importance of the
grove to the people by conducting awareness campaigns before it can begin fencing.
It has been suggested recently that panchayats should consider the importance of this valuable
heritage while preparing village resource maps so that further degradation or change of land
use does not take place in the sacred groves60. The Pattuvom Gram Panchayat was in the news
recently61 (for preparing the first community biodiversity register that not only lists the medicinal
plants and their uses in the region, but have also proclaimed these to be the common property of
the people. That gram panchayats (for instance, the Payyanur Gram Panchayat) are now giving
considerable weightage to the conservation of sacred groves in their development plans (under the
decentralized People’s Plan) is a ray of hope for continued community protection of these sacred
groves.
Ownership is a decisive factor in the conservation of Kerala’s sacred groves. We observe that single-
family-owned groves are the most amenable to conservation, as owners receive sufficient incomes
from offerings and donations to the shrine by devotees. Multiple-family-ownerships are plagued
by differences of opinion among individual families constituting the management committees and
these can be considerable barriers to conservation. It has been suggested by academicians who
have studied sacred groves, that those individual families who are continuing to conserve their
kavus should be exempted from land tax and revenue tax. More than the financial benefit it is the
social acknowledgment that will encourage them to continue their efforts at protecting these small
patches of forest.
We observe that groves owned by institutions are least amenable to conservation, as most
institutions are primarily concerned with increasing incomes from offerings at the shrine/temple.
Cases where timber and other resources from the grove are extracted to supplement their
income in order to conduct more grandiose temple rituals are also observed. Groves managed
by communities or local committees, like family-owned groves, are slightly more conservation-
oriented: the management bodies supplement any shortage of income through local collections
rather than by resource extraction. One primary reason the sacred groves of north Kerala have
 Kerala 335

remained more intact than those in the south is that local caste communities or other
community institutions manage them—government-run Devaswom Boards have
yet to enter the scene62.
3.1.2. Other community forest conservation initiatives
There are also some more recent efforts by communities to conserve forests
and wildlife. For instance, inspired by a sensitively planned ecodevelopment
initiative of the forest department on the periphery of the Periyar Tiger
Reserve, women from several villages joined together to form a ‘Vasant Sena’,
and vowed to patrol the forests to check illegal activities. Since 2003, 5-6
women on a rotational basis go out every day on a regular beat, and record
in a register their observations on the state of the forest, untoward activities
and other noteworthy issues. When asked what their main motivation for
this was, the simple response was: ‘If there are no forests left, what will our
children do?’ Recognising this initiative, the forest department has provided the
women with uniforms and backpacks, and also helped to felicitate them with an
award presented by a local group.

3.2. Conservation of marine resources and coastal

systems63
The crisis of overfishing and degradation of marine resources, described in Section
2.6, did not go unchallenged. The artisanal (traditional) fishermen, who were only
peripheral beneficiaries of the modernization model that brought about the crisis, responded to it
at two levels. The more rapid, widespread and vocal response, at the political level, was in the form
of organized protests demanding state regulation of what they perceived as destructive fishing
methods. This was done through organized movements such as that led by the National Fishworkers
Forum. Their demands included putting a stop to destructive fishing by trawlers and purse-seiners,
zoning of coastal waters into distinct fishing zones and a total ban on trawling operations during
the monsoon months of June-August. These protests led to legal enactments. The Kerala Marine
Fishing Regulation Act, 1980, provided for comprehensive measures for registration of all fishing
craft. It also restricted fishing by mechanized boats—in particular trawlers and purse-seiners—to
a depth outside the 20-fathom depth contour line in the coastal sea. The zone on the onshore side
of this contour was reserved exclusively for the non-motorized and motorized craft.
However, the economically strong and politically influential boat owners’ associations and export
processors’ lobby challenged the government promulgations regulating and restricting their free
access to the coastal commons. The High Court ruled that while the state did have a right to
regulate the coastal commons, it could take action to exclude persons from them only if sufficient
scientific evidence was available to substantiate that these persons’ activities were socially or
ecologically harmful and against the interests of society. Such unambiguous evidence could not
be mustered up by the state government. Although successive state governments enacted fresh
legislations to plug the loopholes in the law, in reality the coastal commons continued to be
open to all. Nevertheless, where the artisanal fisherfolk are well-organised, the coastal waters are
relatively safe from trawlers, helping in localized conservation. The fisherfolk agitation, coupled
with recommendations of a number of expert committees set up by the state government, have
also resulted in a ban on trawling during the monsoons.
The second, slower response of the fishworkers was the adoption of new technologies for
mechanical propulsion of fishing crafts and greater investments in fishing gear in a desperate
attempt to enhance their share of falling harvests. In order to cover the higher operating costs,
fishermen took to fishing in the coastal waters for longer periods of time and with more fishing gear,
including smaller versions of trawl nets and purse-seine nets. This response further aggravated the
state chapter - kerala

level of overfishing, particularly after 1984. There have been some efforts to enhance the biological
productivity of the coastal waters through the establishment of fish aggregation devices such as
‘artificial reefs’ in coastal waters. These could be old truck tyres or a tree trunk deposited in the
coastal waters; within a couple of months, marine flora and fauna are seen to aggregate around
this and it soon resembles a reef ecosystem. Rich pools of fish and other marine life revolve around
this ‘reef’ and the fisherman reaps in his harvest with little effort and through traditional means of
fishing. The Thiruvananthapuram-Kanyakumari coast is now witnessing a trend towards artifical
community reefs. The technical and financial support is being jointly provided by Programme for
Community Organisation (PCO) (a NGO) and the state government. Since most of the natural
reefs in this region have been destroyed due to modern fishing techniques, the artificial reefs
form a reserve during the lean fishing season in January-February. Another positive fallout is that
336 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

trawlers have been prevented from coming too close to the shore as their nets get damaged in
these reefs. Community restrictions are mainly enforced by the village parish, which fixes rules
regarding fishing in the artificial reefs. These include a ban on light fishing64 in the reefs during the
night. Reef committees in these fishing villages have now become a means for fishery experts and
government officials to introduce new ideas and hold fishery management discussions.65
There are also individual and community efforts to protect some of the mangrove areas in north
Kerala. ‘Pokudan’ in Kannur district has gained fame because of his singular efforts at afforesting
mangroves here. Ironically, it is stated that the forest department gets its supply of mangrove
seedlings from this man. In another area in the same district, a section of the mangrove area
has been purchased by a group of local farmers under the banner of ‘Prakruti Karshaka Samiti’,
simply to protect it from being destroyed. Sadly, the local fishermen are not involved66. Vijayan
attributes the non-participation of fishermen to the disinterest of the future generation of fisherfolk
in entering their traditional occupation. There are, thus, only scattered efforts at protecting the
sea coast.

4. Conclusion and way ahead

The forests of Kerala, which were once considered inaccessible and gave the illusion of being
plentiful, have over the years decreased considerably. Official protection of these forests in the
form of national parks and wildlife sanctuaries has managed to cover only about 6 per cent of the
state (Kutty & Kothari, 2001)67; conservation under the Forest Act has also helped, but to a limited
extent. In many of these officially conserved areas, there remain conflicts with local communities
who depend on them for livelihoods, though some recent attempts at sites such as Periyar Tiger
Reserve show initial promise of resolution to the mutual benefit of wildlife and people. The other
form of conservation has been by communities, such as in the case of sacred groves. Although
these groves are only small patches of forest, they perform important ecological functions that
affect the micro-climate and at the same time houses rare and endangered species.68 As mentioned
earlier, these groves are facing destruction due to various reasons. The government should take
sincere efforts towards protecting these groves through community involvement. As a first step,
the 1996 scheme for fencing all the sacred groves in the state should be implemented quickly. This
step will effectively put a stop to cattle grazing, walking, and other threats inside the grove. Where
the groves have been seriously depleted, afforestation, taking into consideration the species profile
in the surrounding groves or forests, should be carried out.
Development of watershed areas and wastelands should have a focus on the sacred groves of that
area. Village panchayats and decentralised planning processes should consider sacred groves while
drawing up the development plan of their village. What is also urgently required is a comprehensive
socio-ecological analysis of the sacred groves of the state, since such a complete picture is lacking.
The concerned government department should carry out a re-survey and reclaim the encroached
portions of the grove, where afforestation should be carried out. Declaring these sacred groves
as ‘heritage sites’, an education-cum-awareness campaign needs to be carried out in the villages
by science organizations, nature groups operating at the village level, and village organisations
themselves. They should give special emphasis on the conservation of existing groves and eco-
rehabilitation of destroyed groves. Considering that they have a literate population, it should be a
relatively simple task to carry out.
Unlike with forests, the state government has not declared any protected areas on the coast or
in the marine areas. Conflicts between destructive commercial fisheries and traditional or artisanal
fishers continue in parts of the state. Several academicians and fisheries experts have come up
with solutions to resolve the fisheries crisis in the coastal waters of Kerala. The scale and type of
harvesting technology should be in consonance with known biological and ecological parameters of
the resource. Small-scale fishing craft using multiple sources of energy, selective fishing gear, and
operations from decentralized centres along the total length of the coastline should be encouraged.
The ownership of harvesting technology—fishing craft and gear—should be restricted exclusively to
those who are willing to themselves fish. Such a community of workers and working-owners should
be entrusted with the collective rights and responsibilities of managing the coastal commons. Policy
reforms to ensure this should be enacted by the state. Some of the
above suggestions are reflected in the recommendations of a number
of expert committees appointed since 1984, which cautioned the
government about the impending crisis if fisheries continued to
grow in an unregulated fashion. The 1984 committee advised
a drastic reduction of the fleet size of the trawlers to half
the then current level and a total ban on purse-seiners. It
 Kerala 337

recommended the use of more passive fishing techniques of the type used by artisanal fishermen
and cautioned against the massive motorization of country craft. It also highlighted the need
for active fishermen’s participation in managing the coastal commons. Subsequent to a third
expert committee submitting its report in 1989, the government immediately implemented a total
monsoon trawling ban. Other recommendations, which included restriction on the use of ring-
seines,69 limitations on horse-power rating of outboard engines, and measures for protection of
estuarine areas were kept in abeyance. The enforcement of the total trawling ban resulted in
bloody confrontations between the enforcement police and the boat owners. The matter was taken
to the courts, which were unwilling to issue a stay order to the government’s decision. This legal
ruling and the unwavering stand of the government, despite the possible adverse political fall-
out, ensured that the ban was relatively effective. It was probably the most important fishery
management decision made by any state government since independence.
The forest department has to seriously consider bringing some of the substantial mangrove areas
in north Kerala under official protection. In addition, a check is needed on the large-scale illegal
sand mining in the rivers, which has had a detrimental effect on the coast. Reduced sand deposition
from the rivers, as well as the peculiar tidal effects in this part of the country, have resulted in the
sea eating away at the coast at a rapid rate in most of Kerala. This has meant that a large human
population is now depending on a reducing land mass. Sand mining has now been recently banned
in most of the rivers in the state. Additionally, the state government has erected sea walls all along
the coast to stop erosion, though some experts contend that this is not very effective. One hopes
that strong political will and a sensitive community will put some of the recommendations of the
marine expert committees into action, especially about reverting to passive fishing techniques
used by artisanal fishermen, without the use of outboard engines. Coastal zoning and management
policies also need to be framed and implemented, with full participation of the artisanal fisherfolk,
at an urgent pace.
The management of agricultural lands is also showing some positive trends, even if tiny by
comparison. This is the move towards organic farming. Farmer groups advocating and practicing
organic techniques have arisen in different parts of the state. Even in plantations, an increased
awareness on the harmful nature of intensive agricultural practices have made plantation owners
adopt more ecologically sustainable methods of cultivating cash crops. The forest department has
started eco-development programmes in the cardamom plantations in the high ranges in Idukki
district. The farming community under the banner of Cardamom for Rain Forest Protection has
joined hands with the forest department in protecting the forests.70 Similar programmes need to
be conducted with other plantation owners. The government should give incentives, subsidies,
exemptions from tax duties or other related financial support to those plantation owners who are
conserving forest patches near their plantations, and who are employing organic methods.
Finally, none of this will be possible without further strengthening decentralised governance. Kerala
has already experimented with some far-reaching measures in this respect, but the environmental
component of this action is weak. An appropriate mix of land and resource rights (especially to
the tribal and fisher communities, thus far marginalised in state policies), local settlement-level
decision-making regarding natural resources, landscape-level planning and appropriate laws are
needed, to consolidate some of the positive steps already taken.

Roshni Kutty is a member of Kalpavriksh Environmental Action Group, Pune/Delhi. E-mail:

roshi73@rediffmail.com

Endnotes
1
CSO, Compendium of Environment Statistics (Central Statistical Organization, Department of Statistics, Government
of India, 1999).
state chapter - kerala

2
The Bharatapuzha, Periyar, Pamba and Chaliyar rivers.
3
E. Kunjan Pillai, Studies in Kerala History (Trivandrum, E.K. Pillai, 1970).
4
Sreedhara Menon A Survey of Kerala History (Kottayam, Sahitya Pravarthaka Co-operative Society Limited, 1970);
P. Joan Mencher. ‘Kerala and Madras: A comparative study of ecology and social structure’, Ethnology, vol. 5,
1966.
5
See Karnataka chapter for similarities with Kerala in terms of plantations and cash-crop cultivation.
6
Ministry of Environment & Forests, National Forestry Action Programme – India: Vol II, Issues and Programmes
(New Delhi, Government of India, 1999).
7
www.censusindia.net. The density has been calculated based on geographical size and population figures available
338 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

on this site, which otherwise does not directly provide the density figures.
8
Malabar is south of Dakshina Kannada district of Karnataka, which was also under Madras Presidency, and thus had
similar policies and laws relating to natural resources, especially forests. See Karnataka state chapter for conservation
in Dakshina Kannada district.
9
Mathew Aerthayil. Fishworkers’ Movement in Kerala (1977-1994) (New Delhi, Indian Social Institute, 2000); R.
Leeladevi, History of Kerala (Kottayam, Vidyarthi Mithram Press, n.d.).
10
(As above)
11
K.C. Zachariah and S. Irudaya Rajan, Kerala’s Demographic Transition: Determinants and Consequence (New
Delhi, Sage Publications,1997).
12
(As above)
13
C. Chandrashekharan, Forest Resources of Kerala: A Quantitative Assessment (Kerala Forest Department, 1973).
14
http://www.fsiorg.net/fsi2003/states/index.asp?state_code=14
15
The first five centuries of the Christian era.
16
Mencher, ‘Kerala and Madras’ (As above); A. Sreedhara Menon, Cultural Heritage of Kerala – An Introduction
(Cochin, East West Publications Pvt. Ltd., 1978).
17
Chola and Cheras were the reigning dynasties of this area.
18
Menon, Cultural Heritage of Kerala. (As above)
19
(As above)
20
(As above)
21
Mammen Chundamannil, History of Forest Management in Kerala (Peechi, Kerala Forest Research Institute,
1993).
22
Nilambur is a forested taluka in Wynad district of Kerala. The first formal forestry operations by the British began
here in 1840, and thus the first office of Conservator of Forests was created here.
23
Menon, Cultural Heritage of Kerala. (As above)
24
Chundamannil, History of Forest Management in Kerala; C.R. Bijoy and Ravi R. Raman, ‘Muthanga: The Real Story
- Adivasi Movement to Recover Land’, Economic and Political Weekly, vol. XXXVIII no. 20 (2003).
25
Ravi K. Raman, ‘Breaking New Ground: Adivasi Land Struggle in Kerala’, Economic and Political Weekly, 9 March
2002.
26
Bijoy and Raman, ‘Muthanga’. (As above)
27
This situation is very similar to what happened in Andhra Pradesh with tribal areas being encroached and taken
over by an influx of non-tribals, thereby depriving tribals of rights over land. Refer AP chapter.
28
Bijoy and Raman, ‘Muthanga’ (As above); Raman, ‘Breaking New Ground’. (As above)
29
P. Unnikrishnan, CCF, Eco-development & Tribal Welfare, Kerala Forest Department. Personal Communication.
2000.
30
Zachariah and Rajan, Kerala’s Demographic Transition. (As above)
31
The highest-ever growth in this century in Kerala occurred during 1961-71 when the population grew at the rate
of 446,000 persons per year. In 1981-91, the growth came down to about 356,000 persons. Zachariah and Rajan,
Kerala’s Demographic Transition. (As above)
32
Initially government of Travancore and later Travancore-Kochi, prior to state formation in 1956.
33
M. Balakrishnan and P.S. Easa, ‘Strategies for Management of Forests and Wildlife in Kerala’, in Recent Trends in
Forest Management (Trivandrum, Department of Forests,1982).
34
M.K. Prasad, Kadum Nadum (Malayalam) (Quilon, Kerala Shastra Sahitya Parishad, 1982).
35
The Kerala state government feared that Malabar, being under Madras Presidency before independence, may stake
a claim to Malabar as part of the new state of Tamil Nadu.
36
One particular large private forest holding belonged to Nilambur Kovilakom, who had been systematically preserving
and managing the forests. The family volunteered to sell the holdings to the government: part of their holdings which
lay in Tamil Nadu (after the re-organization of States) was purchased by the Tamil Nadu government, but their
holdings in Kerala were confiscated.
37
Readers should note that Kerala has two main political streams: UDF (Congress) and LDF (Marxist).
38
J. Kurien and T.R. Thankappan Achari. ‘Overfishing along Kerala coast: Causes and consequences, Economic and
Political Weekly, 18th September 1990, pp. 2011-18.
39
Like polyandry and the Marumakkathayam or matrilineal system of inheritance. Though they follow Makkathayam
or patrilineal inheritance systems as a rule, there are groups of both Brahmins and Muslims in the State that follow
the matrilineal system. Menon, Cultural Heritage of Kerala. (As above)
40
Pillai, Studies in Kerala History. (As above)
 Kerala 339
41
Dr. Satish Chandran Nair, Director, INTACH, (Southern Chapter ) explains, ‘… the traditional community in Kerala
vanished with the advent of the Aryans in the 6th century.’
42
This holds true for the Namboodiri Brahmins, higher groups of Nair and even ordinary middle-class Nair and Thiyya
castes.
43
Mencher, ‘Kerala and Madras’. (As above)
44
(As above)
45
Chundamannil, personal communication; Mencher, ‘Kerala and Madras’. (As above)
46
Such as the Silent Valley Protected Area (Protection of Ecological Balance) Act, 1979.
47
W. Logan, Malabar (Madras, Government Press, 1951).
48
E. Unnikrishnan,Uthara Keralathile Vishuddha Vanangal (Malayalam) (Kannur, Samskriti Publications, 1997).
49
Similar to nagabana in Karanataka.
50
A trust with nominees from among members of the state legislature. The trust looks after the day-to-day activities
of the temple (S. Sankar, KFRI. E-mail communication. 2001).
51
P.S. Ramakrishnan, K.G. Saxena and U.M. Chandrashekara (eds), Conserving the Sacred for Biodiversity
Management (New Delhi, Oxford and IBH).
52
Unnikrishnan, Uthara Keralathile Vishuddha Vanangal. (As above)
53
A type of red soil found along the Konkan coast of India. The high ferrous content in the soil is the cause of its red
colour.
54
Tharavadu are equivalent to clans where descendants have a common ancestral mother.
55
Unnikrishnan, Uthara Keralathile Vishuddha Vanangal. (As above)
56
(As above)
57
M. Jayarajan, President, SEEK, Kannur. Personal Communication. 2000
58
A karanavar is generally the eldest male member of a tharavadu and manages the financial affairs of the
tharavadu.
59
Unnikrishnan, Uthara Keralathile Vishuddha Vanangal. (As above)
60
T.P. Padmanabhan, Director, SEEK, Personal communication, 2000.
61
Stated to be 50 acres as per old records. However, it is now believed to have shrunk to 30 acres. Padmanabhan,
2000, Personal communication.
62
Unnikrishnan, Uthara Keralathile Vishuddha Vanangal. (As above)
63
This section has been extensively quoted from Kurien and Achari, ‘Overfishing along Kerala coast’. (As above)
64
Flares are used by the fishermen, as they attract the fish in the reefs to come near the sea surface, thus making it
easy for the fisherman to catch them.
65
J.B. Rajan, Member of Programme for Community Organisation. Personal communication. 2000.
66
A.J. Vijayan, Founder Member of National Fishworkers Forum and the NGO ‘Programme for Community Organisation’.
Personal communication. 2000.
67
R. Kutty and A. Kothari, Protected Areas in India – A Profile (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2001).
68
P.N. Krishnan, ‘Study on the structure, function and dynamics of sacred groves of Kerala and their conservation’
Project Report. 1998.
69
A smaller version of the larger purse-seine nets.
70
Unnikrishnan, personal communication.
state chapter - kerala
 CCA/Ker/CS1/Eranakulam/Iringole/Sacred grove

Iringole sacred grove, Ernakulam

Background
Iringole sacred grove has an interesting myth of three goddesses, who, while traveling the world,
each settled down in three different places, one of which is Iringole. The name ‘Iringole’ is derived
from ‘Irunna Aval’, which means ‘she who rested here’. Local people believe that even today the
three goddesses meet up here in the evenings and spend the night here. Therefore nobody is
allowed to stay at the grove overnight.
Located three km north-east from Perumbavoor town in the Perumbavoor taluka of Eranakulam
district, the sacred grove can be accessed by several private buses that ply to the Iringole school.
This is the largest sacred grove in the Travancore-Cochin region,1 covering lush evergreen forest
land, though disturbed in certain sections. Studies indicate that the vegetation at Iringole Kavu
is comparable to other evergreen formations in the Western Ghats with respect to floral species
diversity and other characteristics. Waters from the Poorna irrigation project play a crucial role in
keeping the forest lush and green. The sacred tank of the grove can be seen as one approaches
the temple from the northern side.

Towards community conservation

The sacred grove and temple are under the administration and management of the Travancore
Dewaswom Board.2 Previously, this sacred grove was owned by 32 Brahmin illams.3 Only three
illams now survive, and were managing the grove till recently. Due to financial constraints and
administrative difficulties, they could no longer take care of the grove and handed it over to the
state government. The state government slated this grove for developing a tourism centre. This
plan was fiercely opposed by the local villagers and consequently the government had to withdraw
the plan. The village itself does not have any institution of its own to manage and look after the
grove. The villagers still actively protect the grove and oppose any action that may cause harm to
the grove. Villagers strictly adhere to all traditional rules and regulations regarding maintaining the
sanctity of the grove as well as regarding the resource collection from the grove. Some of these
include:
1. No material (plant or animal) is permitted to be taken out of the sacred grove, except on certain
exceptional cases or occasions after consulting the local priest.
2. Fallen twigs, branches of trees or leaves are also not taken out.
3. Women are not allowed to enter the grove during menstruation.
4. Pilgrims visiting the grove are permitted to dip in the sacred tank, but bathing is prohibited.
Violation of the rules that disturb or dispel the sanctity of the sacred grove and its immediate
surroundings were considered to be unpardonable sins that would invite the wrath of the patron
deity.

Impacts of the initiative

case studies - kerala

The local community does acknowledge the fact that the sacred grove has an important impact on
the micro-climate of the region. The constant presence of groundwater in their wells is attributed
to the fact that the grove is important in maintaining the local environment.

Constraints faced by the community

Despite the above measures, the sacred grove is faced by a series of threats:
1. Since the grove is not fenced and is open to entry, outsiders use grove for picnics and leave
behind the usual picnic trash.
341
342 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

2. After the management of the sacred grove was transferred to the Dewaswom Board, the temple
priests are treated as regular government employees. Their duties are to conduct morning and
evening poojas and return home. There is thus an indifferent attitude towards conservation of
the sacred grove.
3. Since the grove is situated in the plains, it is buffeted by strong winds. This has caused the
uprooting of a lot of trees. Tying the temple elephant inside the grove and burning elephant
dung has resulted in damages to the sacred grove.4

This case study has been compiled by Roshni Kutty, Kalpavriksh in 2001.

For more details contact:

Roshni Kutty
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa
908 Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411004
Maharashtra
E-mail: roshi73@rediffmail.com

Endnotes
1
E. Unnikrishnan, Sacred Groves of North Kerala (Samskriti Publications, Kannur, 1997).

2
The board established by the state government to manage sacred groves in the state.

3
These are joint families of the highest caste of Brahmins.

4
Unnikrishnan, Sacred Groves of North Kerala.
 CCA/Ker/CS2/Kannoor/Aravanchal Kavu/Sacred grove

Aravanchal Kavu, Kannoor

Background
Located about 25 km east from Payanoor in Thalliparambu taluka in Kannoor district of north
Kerala, Aravanchal Kavu (sacred grove) is an excellent example of local community involvement
in the management of an old sacred grove. The grove is about 7 acres (2.8 ha) large, situated
in the middle of the grassy plains of Aravanchal village of Peringom Vayakkara Panchayat, which
falls in the midland eco-region of Kerala state.1 The presiding deity for this sacred grove, as in
most sacred groves of Kerala, is the Mother Goddess in the incarnation of Thayiparadevada, locally
called ‘Vellarakurangal Bhagawati’.2
The grove is representative of vegetation structures that would be found in semi-evergreen
forests, Myristica swamps, deciduous forests and grasslands, and grassy meadows. There are
more than 200 varieties of plants in this grove, with Diospyros buxlifolia forming the top canopy
of the forest. However, due to gradual degradation of these forests through forest fires, human
interference and grazing, only the core area of the grove contains the original floral structure. In
the areas where it was open to human interference and others destructive factors, the evergreen
vegetation structure has given way to a deciduous one. These degraded sections of the forest
now contain species of a more deciduous and thorny scrub nature. Trees and shrubs belonging to
the Leguminosae family—a rare occurrence in the evergreen forests—is a common sight in these
groves with the top canopy of these forests now occupied by nandi, Wrightia spp., white silk-cotton
tree, Alexandrian laurel, Dioclea spp., shisam and others.3 Bonnet macaques are stated to be in
such large numbers that these creatures fearlessly interact with the villagers residing outside the
grove.
The kavu is located in a region of 5 sq km where 600 families reside, of which 400 are Hindus,
160 Christians and 40 Muslims. The total population of the village is stated to be around 1000.4
Most of the community members are occupied with agriculture or earn their living through private
service.

Towards community conservation

This kavu once belonged to an old Nair family called Tharavadu. In the memory of the people
of centuries ago, this Nair family abandoned the grove as they felt that it was unlucky for them.
Since then the grove lay without ownership until the 1970s, when the local community took over
its management.
In the past many years the community members had been collecting fallen wood for fuelwood
purposes from the grove and grazing their cattle on the outskirts of the grove. Despite being not
owned by anyone in particular, the sacred grove was respected by all members of the surrounding
villages. People also feared the wrath of the deity if they disturbed the grove in any way. This fear
was one of the contributing factors towards the conservation of this grove over many decades.
Around 1970, the Hindu families (from all castes), residing within a 4 km radius of the sacred
grove formed the Aravanchal Shri Bhagavati Kavu Committee. Presently 400 Hindu families are
members of this committee. A general body meeting is called once a year, wherein an executive
case studies - kerala

committee comprising of nine to thirteen members is elected through voice vote. The executive
committee members in turn elect the president, vice-president, secretary, joint secretary and
treasurer. The objectives of this committee as stated by Shri K.M.K. Nambeeshan, Secretary,
Aravanchal Shri Bhagavathi Kavu Committee is ‘for wildlife protection and to conserve/protect
a place where we can bathe and worship nature’. Although the
committee holds meetings in formal office building, it is interesting
to note that the committee members arrive at decisions related
to the management of the sacred grove through application
of divination techniques, which means passing resolutions
after applying to the local deity. This brings a curious mix of
tradition and modernity to the management of the grove.
343
344 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Although Christian and Muslim families in the vicinity of the sacred grove do not become members
of the committee, they co-operate in the management of the kavu and adhere to all laws and rules.
Women are not permitted to be executive committee members. Traditionally, women were not
even allowed to enter the kavu.
The active interest that Mr. Nambeeshan has taken in the management of the sacred grove has
resulted in the participation of the forest department too. Recently, a 15 sq m tank was constructed
with monetary aid from the forest department.
Certain rules and regulations are strictly followed by the local community:
1. Strict observance of entry and exit into the kavu as per the Hindu calendar.
2. Entry is open to pilgrims only during certain times of the year.
3. No leaf litter/dead branches are permitted to be taken away from the grove.
4. Only during Theyyam festival is fallen wood from the grove collected and burnt for the purpose
of the ritual.
5. Grazing of cattle is also not permitted within the grove limits.
6. Grass from the sacred grove is auctioned once a year, although this does not bring in much
money to the kavu committee.
7. Photography is not permitted inside the grove, or of the Theyyam dancers, as they are believed
to be possessed during the dance.
8. Women are not allowed to enter the grove during menstruation.
Finances for the management of the sacred grove come from donations and offerings of the
devotees and local residents. Villagers believe that some funds from the Dewaswom Board5 have
been allotted to them, though the committee had not received them yet. Once a year, the committee
auctions off grass cut from the grove; the amount goes to the committee fund. However, all these
methods of income generation have proved to be insufficient for the kavu trust, which is a constant
source of worry for the members.
A water tank has been constructed recently with the help of funds collected from the community
members and the forest department. The committee hopes that this tank will not only be useful
to the villagers for bathing purposes but also be a source of water for the wild animals during
summer.

Impacts of the community initiative

The local community hopes that by conserving the sacred grove the water shortage that they
face during summer will be resolved. Aruvanchaal, a perennial stream that originates inside the
grove and flows out from the eastern side of the grove, has run dry over a period of time as the
grove has become smaller and surrounding forests have been denuded. The committee plans to
afforest some area around the grove to create a buffer around it. Through this afforestation, the
committee members hope to rejuvenate the Aruvanchaal stream. They plan to largely plant fruit
trees in order to provide sufficient food for the monkeys of the grove.

Opportunities and constraints

The greatest constraint faced by the committee currently is that of funds. Because of the financial
crunch the construction of the water tank has not been completed. They would also like to take up
the stonewall fencing of the sacred grove on priority if sufficient funds are available.

This case study has been compiled by Roshni Kutty, Kalpavriksh, based on field visits and
interviews with Shri K.M. Kunhappan Nambeesan, secretary of the Aravanchal Shree Bhagawathi
Kavu Committee, in 2001.
 Kerala 345

For more details contact:

Roshni Kutty
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa
908 Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411004
Maharashtra
E-mail: roshi73@rediffmail.com

P. Surendran
Secretary, Kalliasser Gram Panchayat
Kannur District
Kerala

Endnotes
1
E. Unnikrishnan, Sacred Groves of North Kerala (Samskriti Publications, Kannur, 1997).
2
(As above) K.M. Kunhappan Nambeesan, Aravanchal Shree Bhagawati Kavu Committee, personal communication,
2000.
3
Unnikrishnan, Sacred Groves of North Kerala. (As above)
4
Nambeesan, personal communication, 2000. (As above)
5
A board established by the state government to facilitate management and preservation of sacred groves.

case studies - kerala

 CCA/Ker/CS3/Kollam/Ashtamudi/Estuary conservation

Ashtamudi lake, Kollam

Background
This conservation effort has been initiated on the second largest of all the estuaries in Kerala,
the Ashtamudi Estuary. This estuary is connected to the Arabian Sea through a perennial opening
at Neendakara and Sakthikulangara in Kollam taluka of Kollam district. Located on the Kollam-
Alleppy stretch of national highway 47-T, this estuary is situated about 12-km from Kollam railway
junction and can easily be accessed by buses that ply between Kollam and Ernakulam.
The Ashtamudi Lake has a total area of approximately 38 sq km. It has numerous islets occupied
by traditional fishermen. The natural clam bed area of short-neck clams (Paphia malabarica) is
confined to the part of the estuary from the mouth to 3 km upstream with a maximum width of
0.5 m in the middle of the estuary. The communities living along the north and south banks of
the Ashtamudi backwaters are the four panchayats of Chavara, Neendakara, Sakthikulangara,
and Kavanad villages (Kollam district). There are approximately 1000 families from these villages
who are engaged in clam picking and selling. Most of the clam pickers are fishermen and some
of them living on the banks have Chinese dip-nets and normally engage in seasonal fishing in the
backwaters and the sea. There is no cultivated land in this area and it is densely populated.
The important groups of marine life found in the clam bed are polychaetes, bivalves, gastropods
and crustaceans. Seaweed such as Hypnea, Enteromorpha and Gracilaria sp. are also common.
Katelysia optima, a potential clam resource in the Ashtamudi lake, once abundant in the estuary,
is now extinct. The closure of the sluice gates of the Kallada dam, which stopped the flow of fresh
water from the Kallada River, thereby increasing the salinity of the lake, is held to be the cause of
the extinction.

Towards community conservation

Prior to 1981, clams were rarely eaten outside fishing communities in Kerala and hence picked
only for domestic consumption. Also, they had a very low economic value in comparison with fish
and were seen more as recreation for daring youth than a source of livelihood. Due to these two
reasons, only a few families were engaged in clam collection and selling. Traditionally clams were
caught with bare hands from the shallow banks using a simple dugout canoe. The maximum depth
possible for clam picking was about 15 feet.
In 1981, clam fisheries was initiated by the Fisheries Department for export and 200 tonnes
of clams were landed that year for exports. When the export market picked up, more and more
local fisherfolk in the backwaters began to engage in clam picking. During the peak season, about
300-400 traditional canoes engaged in clam picking in the bed. The clams have also been in great
demand by the carbide industry. After the export market grew and the prices soared, the local
community and some outsiders started to harvest clams in large quantities. This led to a noticeable
increase in the socio-economic status of the clam pickers, as the export market could easily
support them. The average annual landing from 1982 to 1992 was 6800 tonnes with a peak of
10000 tonnes landed in 1991. In 1993 the landing data showed a sharp decline with a production
of only 5000 tonnes. This created concern among the clam fishermen who realized, in a very real
and economic sense, the consequences of indiscriminate fishing in the estuary, especially during
case studies - kerala

the spawning season.

In response to the community concerns, Dr. Appukuttan, Head, Molluscan Fisheries Division
of Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI), Kochi, explained to them the hazards of
indiscriminate exploitation of this resource. The community realized the hazards of over-exploitation
and conveyed their concerns to the district administration. A meeting of the fishermen, officials of
the state Fisheries Department, Mining and Geology Department, scientists of the CMFRI and trade
union leaders was held on 26 December 1993. The District Collector was very supportive of the
need to conserve clams and made decisions in favor of the community members despite objections
from some of the trade unionists.

346
 Kerala 347

In the meeting, the following decisions were taken for conservation of clam fishery:
1. To impose a ban on clam fishing from October to January in the estuarine zone, when spawning
and spat settlement occurs (this refers to the process of settlement of the clam spawn onto the
bed which later grows to become baby clams).
2. The mesh size of hand dredges and other nets used for Paphia sp. fishing to be more than 30
mm and for other clams 20 mm.
3. The annual export of clam meat should be less than 1400 kg.
4. Strict control on exploitation of undersized clams by the carbide industry in Tamilnadu.

Box 1
Some facts about clam fishing vis-à-vis shell mining
The mesh size for clam picking dredge nets varies from 30-35 mm. The techniques adopted by
shell miners are the same as that of the clam fishermen except for a few changes. The mesh
size of the dredge net is 14-16 mm and the beds where shells are in plenty are located further
towards the estuary mouth. The area normally used by shell miners is full of shell fossils, which
are buried quite deep in the bed.
Regular fishing is not done over the clam bed when the clams are being picked because the
clam pickers are underwater most of the time and all other craft keep well clear of the clam
bed for reasons of safety. When the clams spawn and the ban is in progress, fishermen use
nets in the water over the bed. This does not harm the clams, as the fishing does not disturb
the clam bed.

The community of clam fisherfolk agreed to engage in other permitted forms of fishing during
the ban period. To impose the ban, members of the community and the informal leaders (usually
the middlemen) had to obtain the District Collector’s order every year. They patrolled the clam
bed areas at their own initiative and expense, while the government machinery played a very
passive role. The scientists of the CMFRI continued to provide great support in terms of spreading
awareness with regular workshops and classes for the clam fishermen.
The informal leaders of the clam picking supervise the processing of the clams for export and act
as middlemen between the exporters and the clam fishermen. An informal meeting is held in the
month of October to decide the date of the ban. This coincides with the spotting of juveniles and
all community members are informed about the start of the ban. They then obtain the order from
the District Collector and hand over copies to the respective police stations. As the local police do
not have any watercraft for patrolling the clam beds, the members of the community patrol the
beds themselves.
Other methods of fishing are followed during the ban, like crab fishing, which takes place in the
night. This opportunity is also used to patrol by night and if any boat is found anchored over the
bed, the entire community is alerted. Shell miners who are from the community are difficult to
deal with. Then there are costs and the trouble of getting the police to reach the waterfront. They
need transport to the bank and they insist on power-driven craft, which has to be hired. The entire
cost of the operations like patrolling, visiting the District Collectorate (which is about 12 km away)
and informing the fishermen of the ban dates is borne by the community without any financial help
from the government or NGOs.

Constraints faced by the community

case studies - kerala

The ban has brought about an increase in the clams landed in the subsequent years. However, the
community is still faced with many challenges:
1. The response from official enforcement agencies and the police has been poor, almost negligible,
and is subject to the influences of the more powerful shell-mining lobby.
2. There is a lack of a proper law regulating the clam fishery. The current ban order in this area
is only a directive from the District Collector, which needs to be renewed every year by the
community.
3. The shell-mining lobby has been indulging in indiscriminate fishing of undersize clams for the
348 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

carbide industry in Tamilnadu. The demand for clamshells, which provide the raw material for
welding gases, cement coatings and poultry feed, has attracted a large group of clam fishermen
towards this trade. Hence there has been a division within the community.
4. The community leaders are also ‘middlemen’ who may sometimes weaken their stand under
pressure from export companies and delay the start of the ban.
5. Mesh size regulations are not being adhered to strictly by the fishermen and there are
instances of large-scale hand dredging of the clam beds with bag nets of small mesh sizes by
the shell miners, which, if continued, will lead to depletion of the clam bed.
6. The lack of funds for conservation efforts like patrolling, holding meetings, and so on.
7. All shell mining activity comes under the Mining & Geology Department and the rest of the
clam fishery is under the Dept of Fisheries. The jurisdiction, and consequently the vigilance, is
divided between two government departments.
The community is apparently losing their drive and energy to conserve their resources and is on
the verge of accepting that wanton mining cannot be stopped by their efforts alone.

Conclusion
Ashtamudi is a very good example where depleting marine resources rang a warning bell for the
fisherfolk whose livelihoods were directly dependent upon the clam yields. This did bring them
together to take some action. However, the action has not sustained itself as effectively as it
started. Although in this initiative the concerned government departments were involved in putting
a system in place for sustainable development, they have not been very successful in carrying the
support through and keeping the community mobilised.

Contributed by John Swamy, independent researcher, Kerala in 2001. Email: johnswamy@vsnl.

com

For more details contact:

Roshni Kutty
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa
908 Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411004
Maharashtra
E-mail: roshi73@rediffmail.com
 CCA/Ker/CS4/Kolavipaalam/Kozhikode/Beach and turtle conservation

Kolavipaalam beach, Iringal village, Kozhikode

Background
Also known as Kotta Kadapuram, Kolavipaalam is the birthplace of Kunhali
Marakkar, a famous maritime warrior of Kerala during the rule of the
Zamorins (AD 1120–1498). Recently Kolavipaalam has been in the
local newspapers for a different reason. The local community here was
awarded the P.V. Thampy award in November 2000 for environmental
protection through community participation. This community is not only
protecting the Olive Ridley turtles that come to nest on the beach but has
also undertaken mangrove afforestation in the estuarine area.
The beach is located in Iringal village of Payyoli Gram Panchayat in Quilandi
taluka of Kozhikode District (11o32’N; 75o45’E). Kolavipaalam beach is situated 46 km north
of Kozhikode. The nearest town is Payyoli, which can be reached by private buses plying from
Kozhikode. Payyoli also has a railway station. The bus service from Payyoli to Kolavipaalam is
irregular. Autorickshaws from Payyoli are available in plenty.
Falling within the coastal eco-region of the state of Kerala, this area shows a typical coastal
ecosystem with an estuarine region towards the northern part of the Community Conseved Area
(CCA). An 8-km stretch of coastal village commons faces the Arabian Sea on its western side and
the Kottapuzha river draining on its eastern side. A 4-km stretch of coastal sandy beach as well
as brackish mud flats can be seen in this area. Mangroves grow in the brackishwater estuarine
regions and attract a large number of attractive marine birds to this area. Turtles come to nest all
along the 8-km stretch of beach starting from Kottapuzha estuary mouth in the north to Payyoli
beach located in the south. The mean annual rainfall is 3,500 mm, with the annual temperature
range between 20oC and 34oC. A 4-km stretch of coastal sandy beach as well as brackish mudflats
can be seen in this area.
The beach stretch is very narrow due to the severe coastal erosion that most of Kerala’s coastline
experiences. The southern portion of the beach is now protected by a sea wall. The Olive Ridley
turtles come to nest on the sandy stretch of the beach, which has not yet been protected by a
sea wall. The village is located very close by and the houses are mostly made of brick and lime
walls and clay-tile roofs. Private coconut plantations occupy the space between the houses and the
beach stretch.
The natural fauna in this area include jackals, several migratory and local birds and Olive Ridley
turtles that come to the beach during the nesting season. Of these, the Olive Ridley turtles face a
threat to survival, both through loss of eggs and habitat destruction.
This is traditionally a fishing community with the majority of the population of 135 families being
Hindus (Thiyya community), with only five Muslim families. Like any other typical coastal village,
this community too draws its major source of income from fishing in the sea. Apart from that they
supplement their income through toddy tapping, exporting dried fish and selling coconuts from
their private plantations. A few cattle (15 in number) are kept by some of the more prosperous
families. These are either stall-fed or grazed on private land.
Although fishing continues to be the major occupation of the community here, the present
case studies - kerala

generation of fishermen has either opted out of this traditional income source or has supplemented
fishing with other sources of income. This is because of a combination of two factors: a)
depleted fish resources, and b) increasing aspirations for a better living standard. The secondary
occupations include mostly self- employment opportunities such as working as trained electricians,
autorickshaw drivers and casual labour, and running small bakeries or other kiosks. The current
People’s Plan1 has helped the women in this village to set up and run two eateries, a dry rice mill
and a sweetshop within the village. Due to the recent pest attack of coconuts that has affected the
coconut production in the state, toddy tapping has also been adversely affected. Dry fish export
was a major cash earner for this village and had also employed around 500 fisherwomen. Due to
the receding beach stretch, space is no longer available for the women to dry large quantities of

349
350 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

fish. The number has now reduced to around 50 women. Some amount of seashells are generally
collected in the rainy months of June to August. Seashell mining met local needs for lime mortar
(which is extracted from seashells) and also added to the small incomes of some of the families
through sale outside the village.
The villagers are protecting the 4-km stretch of coastal village commons which is administered by
the Revenue Department. A stretch of about half a kilometre of the northern portion of the CCA (near
Kottapuzha river mouth) falls in Vadakara municipality, while the rest is in Payyoli Gram Panchayat
area. This is a coastal village where traditional fishing is carried out. At a recent political function in
the village, there was a suggestion to convert this area into a marine national park. However, the
office of the Kozhikode (Wildlife) Division does not have any official proposal to that effect. As far
as the forest department is concerned, Kolavipaalam comes under the Peruvannamuzhi Territorial
Range. Locals say that the Tourism Department also plans to organise boat rides for tourists from
Kunhalli Marakkar’s house in Iringal village to Velliyaangal (also referred to as the Sacrifice Rock)
in Quilandi. Velliyaangal is a rocky island off the coast of Payyoli, situated 14 km into the Arabian
Sea. At present, there are boat rides organized along the Kottapuzha River.

Towards community conservation

Olive Ridley turtles came to nest on Kolavipaalam beach since time immemorial. In 1992, some
of the youth of the village while reading the newspaper (The Hindu) came across an article that
talked about the endangered status of the Olive Ridley turtles. It suddenly dawned on them that
the marine turtles, which came to nest on their beach so regularly needed protection, and this
motivated them to act upon what nature had blessed them with. They formed a group called
Theeram Prakriti Samrakshana Samiti with 12 members. The key persons in this effort are the
present president of Theeram, Mr. Surendra Babu, and the Joint Secretary, Mr. K. Vijayan.
Initially, they had no clue as to how many days were required for turtle eggs to hatch. Hence,
the first nesting season when the protection measure began, they literally spread mats over the
nest and slept there to 1) protect the nest from jackals that abound the area, and, 2) to see when
the hatchlings came out. They deduced that since nobody in their village knew how long it took
for the turtle eggs to hatch and since they have not seen hatchlings come out during the daytime,
the eggs hatched at night and they hence decided to sleep near the nests. It was this lack of
knowledge that prompted these educated village youth to read various books. And that was also
how they realised the importance of protecting the mangroves in their area for the benefit of the
coastal ecosystem.
During the Olive Ridley nesting season of October-March, the youth of the village keep watch over
the beach to check on turtles that come to nest. As soon as a turtle lays its eggs and returns to the
sea, the watchful youth transfer the eggs into a sheltered hatchery that has been constructed for
this purpose. A meticulous record is maintained of the number of eggs that are laid by each turtle,
the dates when these were laid and so on. On hatching, the turtles are immediately released into
the sea. The hatchery is part of the beach that has been fenced off. The fence is made of dried
palm thatch supported on bamboo stakes and wrapped with old fishing nets. The fence is about
seven feet high to provide protection from stray dogs and jackals. Inside the hatchery, the pits are
marked out and paper boards are stuck into the sand that notify the day when the eggs were laid
and when they are expected to hatch. A big threat to these eggs is from the jackals that inhabit the
mangroves nearby. They smell the eggs as soon as they are laid and immediately prey on them.
It is for this reason that the village youth transfer the eggs into the protected hatchery. Initially,
the youth tried to protect the nests in their natural state, by fencing them with dried palm thatch.
But, the jackals burrow through the sand and eat the eggs.
The group also met with active support from the forest department. The Divisional Forest Officer
(DFO) in charge in 1996, Mr. Amit Mallik, took interest in the effort. Later, in 1997, Mrs. Prakriti
Srivastava, DFO, encouraged the local youth to keep watch over the beach by paying daily wages
for four members during the nesting season and providing them with iron cages. However, these
iron cages have not become popular with the youth. Allegedly, these cages have been responsible
for the death of hatchlings that got trapped beneath these cages and could not come out. The
forest department now pays six members of Theeram a wage of around Rs 2500 per month per
person. This scheme is only during the nesting season from October to March.
On realising the important role of mangroves in the conservation of the coastal ecosystem, the
youth have started an afforestation programme of mangroves in about 5 acres in the estuarine
portion of the CCA. This began in 1998 when the forest department and other NGOs conducted
nature camps and slide shows for the residents of this village. The forest department initially supplied
 Kerala 351

mangrove seeds to the villagers. About Rs 15000 has been donated by the gram panchayat to buy
mangrove seeds from private sources in Kannoor. Theeram members encourage and involve the
local residents as well as local school children in planting these saplings along the estuarine region
of their area.
The forest department has plans to set up a nature interpretation centre here. Theeram members
conduct their meetings at a small building that has been constructed with financial aid from the
forest department. This building also serves as a shelter where, during the nesting season, the
members patrol the beach in rotation. There are also a few specimens of turtles and turtle hatchlings
kept as exhibits for visitors. This building thus doubles up as an informal nature interpretation
centre as well as Theeram’s office.
The youth of the village and especially Theeram members are actively involved in the conservation
efforts, and other community members are aware of the conservation effort and provide passive
support to it. Before the involvement of the forest department, funds for guarding the eggs were
generated by donations in cash and kind from within the group and the community. Even now, the
community participates in the mangrove afforestation programme. Whenever nature awareness
programmes are carried out, they are keen to learn new things.

Impacts of community conservation

Although no scientific studies have been carried out in this area to see if these conservation
measures have given results, locals have been emphatic on the positive outcome of these efforts.
Some of these are as follows:
1. Increased fish catch in the areas surrounding the mangroves. Locals state that one can get a
larger number of fish through simple hook and line fishing in the mangroves nearby.
2. It has also been noted that the drinking-water wells located near the mangrove area still contain
sweet water, whereas the rest of the region complains of salty water in their drinking water
wells. This has led the Theeram youth to believe that the mangroves, apart from various other
functions of coastal protection and marine life replenishment, also help in reducing salinity
ingress into the ground water table.
3. There has been an increase in the number of turtles coming to nest and the rate of hatching
success of the turtle eggs is high.
4. Turtle eggs are considered to be a good curative for piles and were once sold in the local market.
This is no longer seen.
5. The youth experience a sense of empowerment as a result of protecting their natural area.
6. As a result of their interaction with the forest department as well as being talked about in the
local media, the youth are now treated with respect by various government officials, which
is otherwise rarely seen. The villagers have taken advantage of this and have submitted a
proposal to the Irrigation Department (through the good offices of the forest department) to
install a drinking water pipeline for their village.
7. As a consequence of being in the news, several people have visited Kolavipaalam and met
Theeram members. This has not only been an enriching experience for the visitors but also for
these young men which has given them a wider perspective of what they are doing and what
other villagers elsewhere have been doing.
8. Even the local governing body, the village panchayat, has recognised their efforts and has
set aside funds during the year 1999-2000 for planting mangroves. This comes as part of the
empowerment of village panchayats through the People’s Plan programme that is currently
case studies - kerala

going on in Kerala.
9. The success of these men has, allegedly, also brought in its wake jealousy
among other villagers. The fame of Kolavipaalam has been attempted
to be hijacked by the neighbouring Mudiyam beach of Vallikunnu
Panchayat situated about 80 km from Kolavipaalam. A news report
of turtles nesting on their beach turned out to be a false one. When
Theeram members read this article they made a visit to Mudiyam
beach to share the information they had with the local people there.
However, they found no turtle tracks. According to Theeram members,
352 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

they were approached by the local villagers of Mudiyam beach for turtle eggs so that the latter
could claim that nesting goes on in their beach. Being the native village of the present DFO has
helped the Mudiyam residents to get World Bank funds for turtle conservation.

Challenges faced by the community

The community itself has faced several constraints/ obstacles that have hampered their
conservation efforts. These are:
1. A financial resource crunch has limited the group’s activity to simply a protection effort. The
youth have expressed their desire to study turtle biology in more detail. They hope to have a
school for nature training, survey and research. The objective of this school would be to impart
knowledge, and create interest and concern for the community’s natural wealth.
2. A couple of individuals whose business interests would violate the CRZ notification have not been
supportive of the protection efforts. Theeram had complained about their illegal construction to
the panchayat, which ensured that the construction was stopped.
3. During the nesting season, the young men have to keep long hours patrolling the beach. This
means that they have a dual responsibility of earning their living during the day and keeping
awake during the night (in shifts) to protect the turtles and their eggs. This responsibility
has also curtailed their choice of occupation, in that only self-employment allowed this kind
of flexibility in working hours. What is heartwarming though is that the Theeram members
have stressed that this is not seen as a constraint, as they have chosen to undertake this
responsibility themselves.
4. The Kottapuzha riverbed is leased out by the state government to rope makers for retting coconut
fibres. Due to the leases granted, there is no land available for afforestation of mangroves. This
has restricted Theeram members from bringing more estuarine land under mangroves.
There was a traditional system of conflict resolution called kadal kodathys (literally translated as
marine courts), where conflicts apart from natural resource conflicts were settled. These conflicts
may be domestic in nature, such as disputes over property, marital matters, etc. Decisions arrived
at these community courts were respected by the formal law and order system. Most of the disputes
were resolved at this community court level and very rarely did they spill over to the formal conflict
resolution systems that were in place. The kadal kodathy of Kolaavipalam was situated in Payyoli,
which is stated to be no longer functioning. However, there are other community courts, which are
active and playing an important role in coastal areas north of Payyoli.

Constraints and opportunities

1. Predation of turtle eggs by jackals, as mentioned earlier, is a considerable threat. The community
has overcome this problem by transferring the eggs into the hatchery as soon as they are laid
and round-the-clock patrolling of the beach during the nesting season.
2. Cutting of old mangrove trees by some of the local community members for cattle fodder and
for retting of coconut fibres has contributed to the reduction in mangroves over the last few
decades. Theeram members have been trying to protect the natural mangrove areas and at the
same time carrying out plantation of mangrove saplings. However, since the original mangrove
area (vegetation) is considered to be village commons, some of the villagers continue to cut the
trees for domestic purposes, although there is a tacit understanding that the offenders will not
destroy the newly planted mangroves. The offenders are under increasing pressure to desist
from such activity through social disapproval.
3. The sand mining lobby, however, poses the biggest threat, not just for the Olive Ridley turtles
but for the very existence of this beach. Coastal erosion of the sandy beach has reached this
level in Payyoli village simply because of the massive sand mining that is being carried out in
the Kottapuzha estuary. Consequently, the process of sand transfer and deposition from the
estuary to the beach and vice versa through changing tides and currents has been disrupted.
Due to sand mining in the estuary, the sea is no longer able to replenish the beach with more
sand from the estuary, while the reverse currents continue to erode the beach. The end result is
that at Kolavipaalam beach, year after year the beach stretch is getting narrower, thus leaving
 Kerala 353

very little area for the sea turtles to nest. Theeram Prakriti Samrakshana Samiti has filed a case
in 1999 in the High Court against the sand mining lobby that is operating here. An interim stay
order was granted by the court, but the enforcing authorities seem to be helpless in putting
a stop to this. One of the reasons could be that the present ruling political party supports the
labour unions that are involved in sand mining.
In January 2001, the sea tides destroyed the hatchery. This was a great setback to the young
group’s efforts. It would not be false to say that this community initiative runs the real risk of
fizzling out since the natural habitat of the Olive Ridley turtles is itself disappearing.
4. Another negative fallout of the sand mining issue is the pessimism that has crept in among some
of the community members here. Although not legally permitted, seashell collection continued
on the seashore as a customary right till the locals realised that this was harming their coastal
ecosystem. Hence they stopped mining for a year or so. However, when sand mining in the
estuary continued unabated, the residents decided to make full use of this natural resource.
They have thus resumed collection of seashell fragments on the grounds that since the coast
is anyway being eroded due to unabated sand mining in the estuary, they might as well make
some money out of it before it finally destroys them.
5. Party politics plays a very important role in Kerala’s social structure. The high media coverage
of the Theeram members has put them under tremendous political pressure of including party
members in the group. So far the Theeram members have been successful in keeping them at
bay. When the members had opened the membership of Theeram to young minds so as to keep
the group active with fresh ideas and to make new ventures and strategies, the youth wing of
a political party threatened them saying that their members must be included. This prompted
them to close the membership and thus Theeram continues to consist of only the original twelve
members who had joined nine years back.
6. The forest department has helped the community to obtain a favorable order from the court; yet
political pressure seems to have scuttled the rest of the effort, leading to non-implementation of
government/ and court orders. For the local community this initiative has led to the empowerment
of their community. It could be said that this effort is unique in the entire world because it has
been born purely out of concern for the natural environment and continues to be so without any
notable financial benefit attached to it.

This case study has been compiled by Roshni Kutty, Kalpavriksh, in 2001. Inputs for the case
study were provided by Surendra Babu, Satish Babu, Ramesh and Vinod from Theeram Prakruti
Samrakshana Samiti, Kolavipaalam.

For more details contact:

Surendra Babu/Satish Babu/Ramesh/Vinod
Theeram Prakruti Samrakshana Samiti,
P.O. Kottakal Turtle Beach,
Kolavipaalam 673521 Kozhikode, Kerala
Email: conserveturtlegrove@yahoo.co.in

Roshni Kutty
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa
case studies - kerala

908 Deccan Gymkhana

Pune 411004
Maharashtra
E-mail: roshi73@rediffmail.com

Endnotes
1
Decentralisation processes in Kerala resulting in devolution of power and finance to local governing bodies such as
village panchayats and municipalities.
Maharashtra
Maharashtra — an introduction
with special focus on the Vidarbha region
Editor’s note: This chapter is a combination of an introductory section on Maharashtra state in general and then
a more detailed section on conservation scenario, state, history and current status of CCAs in Vidarbha region in
particular. Details on status of CCAs in the entire state of Maharashtra could not be compiled.

Location and biogeography

Maharashtra has a total geographical
area of 3,07,713 sq km. The state extends
from 15°35’ to 22°02’ N latitude and from
76°36’ to 80°54’ E longitude. Maharashtra
is bounded by Gujarat to the north, Madhya
Pradesh to the north-east, Chhattisgarh to
the east, Karnataka and Goa to the south
and Andhra Pradesh to the south-east. The
mean maximum and minimum temperatures
in the state range between 46.2° C and 26° C
respectively. The state has a 720 km coastline
bordering the Arabian Sea to the west.
Western Ghats in the Bhimashankar region
Geologically, the state predominantly Photo: Ashish Kothari
comprises Deccan Lavas (Deccan Trap). It
also has Gondwana rocks in the Satpuras and laterite, alluvium and granite gneiss in the eastern
and south-western parts. Some of the main rivers in the state are Bhima, Godavari, Krishna,
Ghod, Koyna, Nira, Mula-Mutha, Wardha, Wainganga, Manjra, Pravara, Dudhna, Purna, Painganga,
Indravati, Tapti and Narmada.
The total forest cover of the state as per the Forest Survey of India (2003) is 46,865 sq km,
covering about 15.23 per cent of the total geographical area. Of the total forest area about 18,478
sq km is open canopy forest. In Maharashtra, three biogeographic zones have been identified,
which cover six distinct provinces:

Table 1: Biogeographic zones in Maharashtra1

Area of Total number

Size of NP/WS
Biogeographic Biogeographic province in sq of national
in sq km (% of
zone (sq km) provinces km (% of state parks/wildlife
province area)
area) sanctuaries
5 Western 5A Malabar 23,626 (7.7) 4 156.75 (0.7)
Ghats (37,554) Plains
5B Western 13,928 (4.5) 4 1,214.46 (8.7)
Ghats
6 Deccan 6A Central 12,679 (4.1) 7 1,760.95 (13.9)
Plateau Highlands
(2,66,693) 6D Central 2,46,148 (80) 23 11,804.40 (4.8)
state chapter - maharashtra

Plateau
6E Southern 7,866 (2.6) 1 10.88 (0.1)
Plateau
8 Coasts 8A West Coast 3,467 (1.1) 1 29.12 (0.8)

Socio-economic profile2
The state is divided into five socio-economic regions: Vidarbha, Marathwada, Western Maharashtra,
Konkan and Khandesh.
As per the 2001 census, the total population of the state is 96,878,627. There are 47 scheduled
tribes in Maharashtra; these include the Gonds, Bhils, Mahadeo Kolis, Warlis, Koknas, Thakurs,

357
358 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Halbas, Andhs, Koli Malhars, Katkaris, Kolams, Korkus and Gamits. The Scheduled Tribes constitute
about 9 per cent of the total population, while the Scheduled Castes constitute about 10.2 per cent
of the total population.
5809 villages and 16 towns in 12 districts, covering an area of 46,531 sq km (about 15.1 per
cent of the area of the state), have been declared Schedule V areas in the state to facilitate
special schemes for the predominantly tribal population here. The Schedule V districts are Thane,
Pune, Nashik, Dhule, Nandurbar, Jalgaon, Ahmednagar, Nanded, Amravati, Yeotmal, Gadchiroli
and Chandrapur. The Tribal Sub-Plan (TSP), which provides for a number of special schemes for
the development of tribal communities, is operational in the entire Schedule V area. To provide
special help and facilities to the tribal communities, the state has instituted four posts of Additional
Tribal Commissioners at Thane, Nashik, Amravati and Nagpur.
As per the provisions of Schedule V of the Constitution, a Tribes Advisory Council has been
formed in the state with the Chief Minister as the ex-officio president and the Minister, Tribal
Development as the ex-officio vice-president. Fifteen tribal MLAs are members of the Council and
two members are nominated by the Governor. The main function of the Council is to advise the
Governor on important matters pertaining to the welfare and advancement of scheduled tribes.
A majority of the tribal population depends on subsistence rainfed agriculture and nearby forest
resources. Non-Timber Forest Produce (NTFP) is one of the major sources of income for most tribal
communities.

Conservation
There are five national parks covering an area of 955.93 sq km and 35 wildlife sanctuaries
covering an area of 14,376.66 sq km. Thus the total area under protected areas (PAs) is 15,332.59
sq km, which is about 5 per cent of the total geographical area. When portions of the Great Indian
Bustard (GIB) sanctuary land are denotified as proposed, this figure will come down to 2.15 per
cent. Melghat, Tadoba-Andheri and Pench are the three Tiger Reserves in the state.
The Joint Forest Management (JFM) programme was introduced in the state in 1992. In 1994,
about 947.27 sq km of forest land was being managed in this manner with the help of 502 Forest
Protection Committees (FPCs). Degraded forest lands and plantation blocks were taken up for JFM.
There are 15,694 villages in the state which contain lands categorized as ‘forest lands’ within their
boundaries (as per the 2001 census). This amounts to a total of 31,653.87 sq km. Status of actual
tree cover on these ‘village forest lands’ or ‘revenue forest lands’, as they are referred to in the
census, is not known.
Sacred groves are a valuable traditional concept of biodiversity conservation. About 2,808 sacred
groves in 500 villages have been recorded in Maharashtra so far, covering an area of about 51 sq
km. Many sacred groves were established to preserve, share and save water resources of the area
they were established in. Linking them with prevailing religious beliefs gave them the required
sanctity and helped to regulate local uses of their resources.
20 Important Bird Areas (IBA) have so far been identified in Maharashtra by the Indian Bird
Conservation Network.3 Though presently there is no Ramsar site declared, 6 Ramsar sites are
proposed in the state.4

Anti-dam protest, Hemalkasa, Gadchiroli district

Photo: Ashish Kothari
 Maharashtra 359

Vidarbha region
Mahadev Girlurkar5

1. Background
Vidarbha or Varhad is the easternmost region of Maharashtra, comprising the basins
of the Wardha, Vainganga and Purna Rivers. The region is a thickly forested,
hilly expanse, interspersed with artificial tanks, and it has significant mineral
wealth. It borders on Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh.
People of different castes from northern India and from Andhra Pradesh
have migrated to this region. A portion of it, known as Jhadimandal (area
of trees) was under the control of a Gond kingdom (hence it is also called
Gondwana), and this has a large proportion of adivasis.
In the mountainous region in eastern Chandrapur and Gadchiroli districts
live tribal communities like the bhils, the gonds, the rajgonds, the korkus,
the kolams, the banjaras, the pardhaans, the raathyas, the halbaas
and the andhraas. Their livelihoods are based on hunting and gathering
plants, honey and fruits from the forests. They visit rural areas to sell
forest produce so gathered. They have distinct cultures and their languages include gondi, kolami,
chhattisgadi and marathi.
The bhils, the gamits, the mahadev kolis, the gavlis, the thaakars, the korkus, the dhaankas, the
paardhis, the naaikdas, the pardhaans, the raathyas, and other tribes make their home in the hills
of the Satpuda mountain range (Amravati district) of Vidarbha. They speak languages like bhilli,
korku and lamani.
The total land area of Vidarbha is 97,404 sq km, of which 63,874 sq km is under forests.6 The
average annual precipitation is 1016–1270 mm.7

2. Wildlife wealth of Vidarbha

Some of the animals to be seen in the forests of Vidarbha are tiger, gaur, leopard, wild dog,
nilgai, sloth bear, sambar, chital, wild boar, chousinga, Hanuman langur, fox, jackal, porcupine,
wild cat, black-naped hare, mongoose, blackbuck, striped hyena, and others. Monitor lizards and
a wide variety of reptiles are also found in the region. In 1994, a slender loris was observed at
the Sulezari water hole in Nawegaon National Park. This animal is usually seen in the forests of
southern India. Chandrapur and Gadchiroli districts of Vidarbha are part of Gondwana, a region
populated by the Gond, Gowari and other tribes. Bhandara district is known as the district of tanks.
Nawegaon National Park in Gondia district is renowned for its variety of birds, being the wintering
grounds of a number of migratory species.

3. Loss of forest wealth of Vidarbha

3.1 Paper industry and the supply of bamboo
The Thapar group started a paper mill at Ballarpur in Chandrapur district. Since 1950, this mill
has been provided with an abundance of bamboo at an extremely low price. According to the local
villagers the extraction techniques have been quite destructive, resulting in the degradation of
state chapter - maharashtra

bamboo forests in the region (also see case study on Mendha-Lekha).

3.2 The bidi industry and the supply of tendu leaves
Tendu leaves are harvested for supply to the bidi industry from most districts of Vidarbha, including
Bhandara, Chandrapur and Gadchiroli. Trees of other species are destroyed while collecting tendu
leaves. The collectors often set fire to patches of forests in order to induce new tender leaves,
considered more suitable for rolling bidis.
3.3 Encroachment on forest land: Jabran jote andolan
The Government of Maharashtra passed legislation to regularise encroachments on revenue
and forest lands that were made between 1 April 1972 and 31 March 1978. Thousands of cases
of encroachments in Vidarbha were thus regularised. In Vidarbha, the jabran jote andolan (a
campaign to bring under cultivation forest area for the benefit of the disprivileged) had converted
much forest land to agricultural use.
360 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

3.4 Mat weaving and the burad community

Members of the Burad community residing around Navegaon National Park and Nagzira Sanctuary
weave mats from bamboo. The government has a policy of supplying bamboo to them at a
concessional rate. But the businessmen exploited the Burad community, tricking them into passing
on the concession to them, and mass-producing mats. Thus a scheme introduced for raising the
standard of living of the Burad community was hijacked by the business community, which became
rich at the cost of the Burads.
3.5 Hunting
Tiger, sambar, and other wild animals are still hunted illegally both for meat as well as sale.
3.6 Encroachment of Kathiawadis on the forest
Cattle and sheep of Kathiawadis (a migratory herder community from Kathiawad in Gujarat)
are seen in large flocks in Vidarbha. These communities have traditionally been passing through
these forests. Now with reducing forest cover and increasing number of cattle there are constant
conflicts with the local communities. Many Kathiawadis have, in fact, begun to purchase land and
to settle down here.
3.7 Coal mines
Bearing huge deposits of coal, the forests in Vidarbha are being degraded because of coal
mines.

4. Forest control and administration

As in some other parts of the country, the British introduced the malgujari system in order that
they might retain control over agricultural and forest land and maximise use of produce from
revenue forests. This system is also called the saranjamdari or ryotwari system elsewhere. The
malgujars were expected to collect tax on the use of any forest produce by locals and to pass it on
to the government. Later, ‘the malgujari forests of Vidarbha were transferred to the FD and nistar
rights (customary rights) were given to villages for
the satisfaction of their daily requirements. For this
purpose, the revenue department appointed nistar
officers, who set up a system for each settlement.
The forest land used for satisfaction of nistar rights
was not planned for, scientifically and hence over a
period of time, it was degraded so that only sparse
scrub (called Bhu-khanda-van or class ‘E’ forest)
remained. And the area remained under the control
of the revenue department except settlements in
and around forests; the rural areas in Vidarbha
have hence become barren.’8
Old forests stretching over large areas are still
seen in some parts of Vidarbha. Some of these still
Satpura landscape Photo: Kishore Rithe
surviving forested patches include, the parts of
Akola district adjoining Yavatmal district, the hilly parts of Gavilgad, the hills of southern Satpuda
in Amravati district, the hilly part of Nagpur which adjoins Madhya Pradesh and the hills and
low-lying areas of Gadchiroli and Chandrapur districts. These surviving stretches of forests are
invariably inhabited by adivasis. Their minimal needs and forest-friendly lifestyles are the reasons
why these forests remain. Some forests included in the national parks and sanctuaries of Vidarbha
are a part of such forests.

4.1 National parks and sanctuaries

Four of the five national parks in Maharashtra—Gugamal NP, Nawegaon NP, Pench NP and Tadoba
NP—are in Vidarbha. The area they cover adds up to 868.97 sq. km. In addition to these, seven out
of the 25 sanctuaries in Maharashtra—Melghat (Project Tiger), Andhari, Bor, Chaprala, Katepurna,
Nagzira and Painganga—are also in Vidarbha and their combined area is 2587.19 sq. km. Besides,
six of the eight sanctuaries declared by the Government of Maharashtra in August 1997—Amba-
Barwa (Buldhana), Tipeshwar (Yavatmaal), Dnyanganga (Buldhana), Bhamragad (Gadchiroli),
Narnala (Akola) and Vaan (Amravati)—are in Vidarbha and they cover a total of 708.70 sq km.9
 Maharashtra 361

4.2 Management of forests through rural participation

Under the National Forest Policy, the Government
of Maharashtra implemented the Joint Forest
Management (JFM) scheme in 1992 with the
objective of regenerating degraded forests with
help from the local people. In return the protecting
communities were to receive 50 per cent of the
benefit from any harvests from these forests.
Even before the implementation of JFM and
unknown to policy makers and others, however,
people in certain rural settlements were protecting
their nistar rights and the forests in which they
enjoyed these rights. These villages included Adyal
Tekdi, Lakhapur, Dhorpa, Saigata and Metepaar in
Brahmapuri taluka, Belgata and some surrounding Discussion with gram sabha, Mendha Lekha,
Gadchiroli district Photo: Neema Pathak
villages in Mul taluka of Chandrapur district, as well
as Mendha (Lekha) and other villages in Gadchiroli (See Case Studies).
In most of the above cases, the main decision-making body for the management and protection
of these forests was the village gram sabha (the general assembly of the village or the hamlet)
and its members managed the forests as per the principles of self-reliance, self-rule and villages’
sovereignty. The examples of these villages lead to the spread of the message about the responsibility
for forest protection among rural society, its organisations, individuals and administration. As a
result, many villages in Chandrapur, Gadchiroli and Buldhana districts took the lead in protecting
their forests, thus setting an example for the rest of the state.

The state introduction has been compiled by Anuradha Arjunwadkar, member of Kalpavriksh,
primarily based on information from: P. Pande with N. Pathak, National Parks and Sanctuaries
in Maharashtra – Reference Guide (Mumbai, Bombay Natural History Society, 2005).
The detailed information on Vidarbha region has been provided by Mahadeo Girlurkar, ‘Khoj’,
c/o Shri P.M. Khandelwal, Near Govind Lodge, Gujari Bazar, Paratwada – 444805, in March
2001. We are extremely grateful to Ajay Dolke, Yavatmal District, Maharashtra for additional
inputs.

Endnotes
1
Source: W.A. Rodgers and H.S. Panwar, Planning Wildlife Protected Areas Network in India, Report prepared for
the Department of Environment, Forests and Wildlife, Government of India (Dehradun, Wildlife Institute of India,
1988).
2
Official website of Maharashtra Tribal Department at http://cgwb.gov.in/CR/achi-gw-resou.html.
3
Source: M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani. Important Bird Areas of India: Priorities of Conservation (Mumbai, IBCN:
BNHS and Bird Life International, UK, 2004).
4
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani. Potential Ramsar Sites in India. (Mumbai, IBCN:BNHS and Birdlife International, UK,
2006).
5
Translated by Anuradha Arjunwadkar
6
Source: Forest Department, Maharashtra Rashtriya Udyane va Abhayaranyancha Sadyasthitidarshak Ahwaal
(National Parks and Sanctuaries, Report on the Current Status) (Maharashtra Forest Department, March 1995-96).
state chapter - maharashtra

7
Government of Maharashtra, Cultural Activities Department, Maharashtra: Bhumi va Lok (Land and People),
Gazetteer (Government of Maharashra, 1996).
8
W. Padmakar, ‘Graminanchya Sahabhagatun Vanavyavasthapan Chikitsakman Drishtikshep’ (Forest Management
through Rural Participation: A Perspective), Deshonnati, 8 November 1997.
9
P. Pande with N. Pathak, National Parks and Sanctuaries in Maharashtra – Reference Guide (Mumbai, Bombay
Natural History Society, 2005).
 CCA/Mah/CS10/Pune/Ajeevali/Sacred grove

Ajeevali sacred grove, Pune

Background
Sustainable use of plant and animal species
by rural people can play an important role
in conservation of particular ecosystems.
In India, as elsewhere in many parts of the
world, a number of communities traditionally
prohibit harvests from patches of forests
termed as ‘sacred groves’ and dedicated to
deities or ancestral spirits. Amongst varied
religious practices the most significant from
an economic viewpoint are those relating to
the preservation of sizable patches of forest,
sometimes as much as 20 hectares in extent,
as sacred groves.1
Ajeevali village (18.50 N, 73.520 E), with
a land area of 493 ha, is situated in Maval
taluka in Pune district, Maharashtra State
in Western India. The nearest town is
Old statue of the deity Waghjai, in the grove
Lonavala. (28 km from Ajeevali) The village Photo: Supriya Goturkar
can be approached from Pune, which is at a
distance of 50 km by road. The village is situated in the eastern offshoots of the Sahyadri mountain
ranges (popularly known as the Western Ghats). The terrain in and around the village is undulating.
A part of the village boundary overlaps with the taluka boundary of Maval and Mulshi. The village
is on a sloping hillside, one side being flanked by a steep cliff. The highest point is about 3000 feet
above mean sea level. The village lies in the catchment of the river Pavana and is situated on the
banks of the backwaters of Pavana dam. Agricultural fields surround the landscape.
A number of streams flow down the hill slopes, forming the source of water for agriculture and
fish that migrate upstream for breeding. The region receives heavy rainfall of around 4300 mm
from June to September. Winters (from October to January) are cold with temperatures dropping
to 40C. Summers (February to May) are hot when temperatures rise up to 400C.
The village shows the following landscape elements: human settlement and temples, agricultural
fields, sacred grove along the mountain, a dense vegetation patch of privately owned plots and a
patch of sparse vegetation (privately owned plots) which is allotted for cattle grazing and fuelwood
requirements.
All forest land in the village is privately or community owned. The decision-making body in the
village is the gram panchayat (formed of elected representatives of people), which governs the
overall administrative and village welfare activities. There are three schools in the village. The
village is supplied with drinking water through taps and has electricity. People also drink well water
which has to be brought from a longer distance.
Ajeevali has a good semi-evergreen forest patch of 22 acres, a sacred grove traditionally
case studies - maharashtra

conserved by the local people. A special feature of this grove is the abundance of fish-tail palms
from which maadi—a popular local liquor—is extracted commercially. Interestingly, religious belief
coupled with this activity of maadi extraction play a crucial role in the conservation of the grove
and village economics.
The village population consists of a single community, the Kunbi Marathas, with agriculture
as the main occupation. The tribal community of Katkaris that is mainly dependent on natural
resources is found in the surrounding forests. Katkaris do not have a permanent settlement in the
village. There is a small Katkari pada (a small settlement of Katkaris) in the neighboring village
of Shilim. Agriculture is the main occupation of the people. Rice is cultivated traditionally here,
the ambemohor variety being the speciality of this area. Other varieties of rice cultivated are
kolam,saal, jire saal, indrayani, etc. Ragi is also cultivated traditionally on the hill slopes by the
cyclic raab (mature and dried Strobilanthes callosus on selected hill slopes is slashed and burnt
402
 Maharashtra 403

every seven years and ragi is cultivated). These two main crops are grown using only rainwater.
But recently there is a decreasing trend in ragi cultivation, the very strenuous work involved in
ragi cultivation being the main reason given by the villagers. Other crops cultivated include wheat,
masoor, gram, beans, tur, vegetables, etc. However the other crops are grown on a very small
scale due to lack of irrigation facilities.
There has been an increasing trend in the use of inorganic fertilizers for farming, although many
farmers are aware about the negative impact of their over-use. It is a usual practice to grow crops
and vegetables for personal or domestic use separately using only organic manure, and to use
chemical fertilizers for crops grown for sale. The villagers say that organically grown food is tastier
than that grown using inorganic fertilizers.
Nearly all the land in the village is privately owned. The sacred grove of Ajeevali is a common
property resource owned by the entire village. In recent times, some additional privately owned
forests adjoining the grove have been collectively dedicated to the temple by the villagers in the
name of the goddess. Uncultivated private land under forest cover on the slopes is being rapidly
sold off to people outside the village, usually from the urban elite.
The sacred grove is situated at an altitude of around 1000 mamsl. As one travels from the village
to the grove, a gradual change in the vegetation is observed. Agriculture fields start adjacent to
the habitation. Exotic species like eucalyptus (nilgiri), Thespesia populnea, casuarina, etc. are seen
here on the bunds. In addition to this, other plant species like Bombax ceiba, Terminalia tomentosa,
Holoptelia integrifolia, Eliodendron glaucum are seen in this patch up to a distance of about half
a kilometre from the village. Next starts a vegetation patch with deciduous species and relatively
fewer agriculture fields. Tree species found are Madhuca indica, Oidna wodier, Anogeissus latifolia,
Bridelia retusa Hollarhena etc. In these are the scattered Acacia catechu patches. This degraded
secondary vegetation indicates a considerable human and cattle interference. As we proceed
further, a relatively wooded patch appears showing species composition of Erythrina suberosa,
Mangifera indica, Lagerstroemia lanceolata, and Terminalia tomentosa. At an elevation of about
60 m from the village a predominant bamboo area is seen along a stream. Then starts vegetation
dominated by Terminalia tomentosa. However, at this stage evergreen species like Caryota urens,
Mangifera indica, Syzigium cumini and Pongamia pinnata can be noticed. This is woodland with
considerable canopy. Thus the gradual change in the quality of the forest continues till the grove,
where a sudden change in the vegetation is observed due to sharp boundaries of the grove.
The sacred grove shows the presence of densely wooded patches with species composition like
C. urens, Mangifera indica, Atlantia racemosa, etc. The opened-up habitats outside the grove
favoured growth of deciduous trees such as Terminalia, Bridelia, Grewia, etc. A heterogeneous
plant community comprising pioneer species like Mappia foetida, Macaranga peltata, etc. is seen
outside. As mentioned earlier, activities such as fuelwood collection and timber extraction are
common outside the grove, leading to degradation of vegetation. The biomass of the sacred grove
forest is significant (145 T/ha) as compared to that of the habitat outside.

Comparative analysis of forest in the sacred grove and outside

Area Sampled Density per Quadrat Canopy Cover Biomass

Habitat
(sq m) (min./max.) (%) T/ha
Grove 1600 18/47 >80 145

Outside 800 18/40 40-60 72

case studies - maharashtra

The grove is a densely wooded forest with more than 80 per cent canopy and can easily be
distinguished from the surrounding degraded forest. Such a dense canopy makes the grove the
last refuge for the animals like giant squirrel. Among other animals, Ajeevali sacred grove harbours
diverse kind of fauna such as Hanuman langur, Malabar giant squirrel, barking deer, wild boar,
leopard, porcupine and white-backed vulture, in addition to being home for a variety of other birds,
insects, amphibians and reptiles.

Towards community conservation

The grove is a dense patch of vegetation of 16 hectares. It has been conserved since ancient
times in the name of Goddess Waghjai (the Tiger Goddess). The grove is locally called as Waghjai
chi Devraai (the sacred grove of the Tiger Goddess) or the raai (grove). The village community has
404 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

deep faith in the goddess. The grove has a natural cave in which is situated the idol of the deity:
a small stone, painted saffron. There is no construction of any temple or roof over the idol. It is
a belief that deities having no roof or temple construction are more fierce and powerful. People
visit the grove during special occasions like marriages, festivals, before beginning any important
farming activities, etc.
Every year, starting from Chaitra Pournima (full moon day of the first month of the Hindu
calendar, around April), they celebrate the four day-long annual festival - urus of the goddess. A
ritual called bagad is performed on Chaitra Pournima. In this festival, a galkari (a person believed
to have spiritual powers) is hung from a 20 m pole of teak wood with the help of metal hooks
pierced through his back. It is believed that a tiger spirit enters the body of the galkari and some
other members of the community (bhagat). These bhagats are worshipped by offering flower
garlands and applying tilak on their foreheads. After a short procession lasting for about an hour,
the actual ritual is performed. The bagad represents human sacrifice to the deity. The villagers
organize wrestling competitions, spiritual discourse and devotional song programs. During the urus
all the villagers take their meals together. All activities are performed in the village in front of the
temple. No activity is performed in the grove except for a few rituals performed by the bhagat and
a few villagers, and carrying the palanquin with the deity from the cave to the village temple.
All Hindu festivals are celebrated with great enthusiasm and villagers come together at these times.
The most important festivals include Diwali (October-November)—associated with the harvest season
and Ganesh Chaturthi (August-September). During the activities conducted with schoolchildren,
their attitude towards the grove was noted. The boys visit the raai weekly or fortnightly, just for
fun, and during special occasions like festivals and while accompanying visitors and guests who
come to drink maadi. Girls do not visit the raai as frequently as boys do, since they are advised not
to do so by their parents due to safety considerations. But they also visit raai during festivals and
other occasions. Most of the children (including girls and boys) know the types of large mammals
found in their raai. They do not know names of any birds but they are aware that a great diversity
of birds is found there. Analysis of a painting exercise (picture of the grove as subject) conducted
for the students to know their perception of the grove showed the association of the deity, dense
vegetation, and the grove with the fish-tail palm and maadi extraction being the most important
constituents of the grove.
There is a strict taboo which restricts the entry of women during menstruation. Women visit
the grove on special occasions like festivals and ceremonies. Women in the village whose male
family members are involved in maadi extraction have the additional job of going to the raai to
take food for them twice in a day. They do take turns sometimes. These women also have to share
greater responsibility of the farm since the male members are busy with maadi during the season.
However work involving strenuous efforts like ploughing is done by the male members only, during
which their kin or friends look after their maadi business for that day.
Men visit the grove more frequently than women. The reasons for visiting include worshipping
and praying to the goddess during festivals, important ceremonies and before commencing any
important agricultural activity for the season. Men involved in maadi extraction business have to
go to the grove regularly during the season.
People from Ajeevali recognize the benefits of the grove like the grove acting as aquifer recharge,
thus aiding water conservation and supply to the village which has no irrigation facilities and thus
is largely dependent on this water for their farms. Some villagers also have knowledge regarding
the role of birds and animals like frogs, etc. in pest control on their farms.
Tribal people visit the grove for hunting.
Hunting is legally banned here as in other
parts of the country. Katkaris mainly depend
on hunting and wild edible plants for food.
Wild boars, barking deer, mouse deer,
partridges, quails, hares, crabs, etc. are killed
and eaten by Katkaris as well as villagers.
Katkaris use home made searchlights and
handmade guns for hunting. Many villagers
are maalkaris—a cult which refrains from
non-vegetarian diet. Tourists from urban
areas occasionally visit the village for
hunting and drinking maadi.
About 20-30 years ago, against the
background of decreasing religious beliefs,
Ajeevali sacred grove Photo: Supriya Goturkar
 Maharashtra 405

many sacred groves in this area were lost when sold to coal merchants for economic gains,.
Ajeevali sacred grove was also on the way to being sold as nearly half of the village population
was for it. However a teacher from a nearby village along with Jagdish Godbole2 convinced the
villagers to protect the grove by suggesting a long-term economic benefit from maadi extract from
the grove. The sap exudates for maadi are collected by cutting off an inflorescent axis of the fish-
tail palm plant. After this incident, a few villagers, especially the politically stronger ones, started
reaping benefits from maadi extraction and sale.
Till 1986, any interested villager, and especially those who were politically strong, used to go to
the sacred grove to extract maadi. The villagers realized that the benefits were being cornered by
a few in the village. A decision was then taken by the village assembly for sarvajanik (community)
maadi extraction, where the rights for extracting maadi would be contracted out. Villagers, however,
were concerned that contracting people from outside the village for this purpose may affect the
sustainability of the process. The extraction rights of the maadi are therefore auctioned to those
interested from within the village. Under this system the extraction is still carried out by the same
powerful people of the village but the benefits are now shared as a common village fund. The
revenue thus generated is used in village welfare and religious activities. As the funds generated
by maadi increased, villagers established a system of a well-defined and organized management
structure comprising the temple trust, the gram panchayat and the maadi extractor.
Under the current system the contract is necessarily awarded to a local person, thereby increasing
their stake in conservation and assigning them the responsibility of protecting the grove while
extraction of maadi. Activities like hunting, grazing and extraction of timber and non-timber forest
produce (NTFP) other than maadi inside the grove were traditionally prohibited because of religious
beliefs. This regulatory system has now been revived under the contract system.
The decision-making body in the village is the gram panchayat, which governs the overall
administrative and village welfare activities. The second management institution in the village is
the temple trust, which governs the activities related to the sacred grove. It works independent
of the village gram panchayat. The temple Trust is a committee of 13 villagers, and works as a
self-governed organization. It functions with a president, a vice-president, a treasurer and the
trustees. It has a pivotal role to play as strong religious taboos are attached to the grove. The trust
has the administrative authority regarding management of the grove. Annually, the contract for
maadi extraction in the grove is auctioned by the temple trust. The revenue thus generated (Rs
1,50,000 per year) is managed by the trust for village welfare and religious activities.

Impacts of community action

In Ajeevali (sacred grove and surrounding area), so far a total of about 250 species of plants
have been recorded from the grove and its catchments. These species are distributed across
various habitat types such as semi-evergreen forest, moist deciduous and dry deciduous vegetation
patches, scrub jungle and grasslands. 75 per cent of the total recorded plant species have utility
value. Wild edible plants (about 30 species) recorded from the study area supplement tribal diet
during rainy season, e.g., Dioscorea pentaphylla, Meyna laxiflora and Nothapodytes nimmoniana
(syn. Mappia foetida), a globally endangered and endemic species, well known for its anti-cancer
and anti-HIV properties. The grove gains significance because of the presence of Nothapodytes.
The population of this species has declined by 50-80 per cent during last decade from the other
parts of Western Ghats owing to clandestine trade. In addition to Nothapodytes, we also recorded
8 species of medicinal value which belong to IUCN threat category, and 4 endemic tree species.
Abutilon ranadei, a species believed to be extinct from the Western Ghats region, was also recorded
here during this study.
case studies - maharashtra

The quality of the grove forest is good enough for its limits to be clearly identified in the landscape.
The surrounding vegetation of the grove that is under the influence of human interference is different
in composition, and lacks in lianas and certain evergreen tree species which are found in the grove
(as mentioned earlier). Lianas and sciophytes such as Actinodaphne hookeri are recorded in the
grove, whereas heliophytes such as Bridelia retusa, Butea monosperma are frequent outside.
C. urens, from which maadi is extracted, is concentrated in a 8 ha forest patch of the grove.
Out of 22 tree species found in the grove, C. urens, an indicator species of evergreen and semi-
evergreen forests, is the most abundant. It grows among tall trees, in the humid atmosphere
and humus-rich soil. This species, currently threatened due to human interference, was once a
prominent tree in the high rainfall regions of the Western Ghats. Thus sacred groves where this
species is proliferating in large numbers become important from a species conservation point of
view.3
406 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The current population structure of the palm in the grove could be attributed to its historic
and present use. Activities like hunting, grazing and extraction of timber and non-timber forest
produce (NTFP) other than maadi have been prevented on religious grounds since ancient times,
when the sacred practices must have been established. The pre-existing rules and regulations
regarding harvesting of forest produce are now being followed more strictly in the contract system.
The contractor has the responsibility of protecting the grove. This has restricted activities such as
collection of leaf litter that led to trampling of the saplings and eating of the pith of young palms
by the tribal people that led to reduction in the number of palms.
The sap exudates for maadi are collected by cutting off an inflorescent axis of the plant. Those
employed (from local tribal communities) for extracting the sap, have a good understanding
of the phenology and population structure of the palm. They have also devised methodologies
for maximum extraction. According to the villagers who are experienced in maadi extraction,
the business of maadi extraction is a profitable one. The economic turnover, summing up two
harvesting seasons, was as high as Rs 3,00,000 to 4,00,000. As per the sources, each palm when
tapped yields about 200 bottles (150 litres), each worth Rs 15, in one season. Thus the income
obtained from one palm amounts to about Rs 3000 per season.
It is well understood that the sacred groves also often serve as a last refuge for many species
of flora and fauna. Ajeevali sacred grove too harbours diverse kind of fauna as reported above. A
number of wild edible and medicinal plants are commonly found in the grove and its surrounds.
Endangered species such as Ceropegia spp. are commonly sighted not only in the grove but also
in the other landscape elements in the village. The grove therefore acts as an important wildlife
habitat, as a source for recharging local aquifers and helps in soil binding and soil conservation.4

Opportunities and constraints

The present study points towards a possibility of continued protection to the sacred grove and
the palm species coupled with the religious and economic aspects. The practice of conservation
along with commercial linkages at a local level needs to be understood further and studied for its
economic, ecological as well as institutional sustainability. There are some issues that currently
face this initiative, including:
1. Increased migration of youth to cities like Pune and Mumbai in search of employment, so less
people interested in looking after the grove.
2. More and more people finding it difficult to manage their landholdings and are selling it to
outsiders for real estate development.
The current system of conservation definitely needs positive external intervention to strengthen
it to deal with these challenges resulting from the changing socio-economic scenario.
Local individuals who are concerned with the future of the grove are concerned about the sale of
village land to outsiders. They are also concerned about ecological changes within the grove. For
example the local knowledgeable individuals (KIs) regard the trend of the high level of regeneration
of C. urens as detrimental for the regeneration and growth of other species. However they also
encourage extraction of maadi because of its economic value.
A local KI has suggested an adaptive management strategy for dealing with some of these
problems, which includes:
• Cut off the palm inflorescences at a critical timing during the year for controlling their rapid
population increase.
• Deal with the problem of land being sold to outsiders: the money generated from the auction
could be used to buy plots in Ajeevali from villagers who wish to sell them to outsiders. This way
the land will be protected from outsiders and the area under the grove can be increased.
• Give the farmers options like medicinal plant cultivation, through facilitation by some NGOs, etc.,
and make them aware of conservation values and guide them. The farmer can be a responsible
agent for protecting the grove. Thus, strengthening the people’s initiative by intervention and
support of some NGO can help in conservation.

Recommendations
1. Strengthening of existing conservation initiatives/traditional practices
Some people from the village know the importance of biodiversity conservation and sustainable
use of natural resources. In the context of rapid urbanization and land being sold to outsiders
 Maharashtra 407

for farmhouse construction, it is necessary to encourage such knowledgeable people to come

forward. These individuals can help initiate a conservation movement by reviving the traditional
ecological knowledge and reach this awareness to each and every villager. There are examples of
conservation initiatives in the past from this area.
As children are an important medium to spread awareness and information among the villagers
through their parents, local school programmes can integrate revival and use of traditional
knowledge and new local ecological findings in their curricula. This would be an important method
of reviving conservation aspirations in the village.
Some NGOs have in the past tried to work with the women in the village and form self-help
groups (SHGs). Local politics and other reasons ensured that these SHGs did not work for too
long. Various interactions as part of the current study encouraged the women to restructure and
revive these. Presently there are two SHGs in the village. These SHGs need to be encouraged and
sustained. Through these much work towards conservation in the area can be achieved. These
SHGs could also be the medium for village women to establish natural resource-based economic
independence.

2. Additional economic gains to the people

Tourism already exists in the village to a certain
extent. Presently tourists come mainly for hunting
and drinking maadi. Ajeevali and the surrounding
area can be developed into an eco-tourism area.
The eco-tourism program can be run by the local
people, following a ‘Panchsutri’ (a set of five
principles: organic food, handloom/khadi cloth,
wooden/bamboo furniture, herbal medicines and
bio-fuels), aimed at sustainable livelihood, through
providing to the urban people, who need such
changes desperately, organic food which is more
nutritious and tasty; herbal medicines, which have
greater value and effects (naturopathy centre);
bamboo or wooden pottery/furniture/cottages;
traditional hand-woven/khadi clothes and energy
Traditional fishing by the Katkari tribe
generated with the help of bio-fuels such as biogas/
Photo: Supriya Goturkar
bio-diesel/solar panels. In such a situation, there
is a greater possibility of Ajeevali becoming self-governed and self-sustaining. This will again yield
mutual benefits to people as well as ecosystem.

3. Conservation model through villagers’ participation

Villagers’ participation in the conservation process is an important factor. People should
understand the importance of biodiversity and the need for its conservation for a sustainable
future. Environment education and awareness programs are necessary for increasing people’s
understanding about biodiversity around their village. People should be made aware of the legal
provisions for protecting their rights over biodiversity and other natural resources. The working
of the present temple trust needs to be studied and suggestions for improving its working and
efficiency should be given. An important role in this can be played by experts and government
or non-government organizations working in the field of natural resource management and
case studies - maharashtra

biodiversity conservation.

4. Legal provisions for conservation of biodiversity

Various existing legal provisions that could be used in the village after sufficient discussions in
the village and after receiving villagers’ consent include:
• Looking at the close dependence of people on the biodiversity, only if the local people are willing,
it may be possible and advisable to declare the area as a community reserve. This will make
conservation a participatory as well as a legal process.
• Another provision can be to declare the sacred groves as a Heritage Site under the Biodiversity
Act 2003. But the details of what this provision stands for how or whether it is the best means
to support initiatives of this kind was not very clear till the time of writing this case study. Under
408 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

the same Act, however, there is a possibility of strengthening the present initiative through the
formation of a village-level Biodiversity Monitoring Committee (BMC). However, it is important
that the composition of the BMC is acceptable to the villagers and the rules and regulations
formulated are locale-specific and respect the land-use pattern that the villagers have established
for this area, particularly the sustainable harvesting of maadi and other NTFP.
• Declaring this area as an Ecologically Sensitive Area under the Environment Protection Act 1976
would restrict construction and destructive development in this area.
However different provisions would have their own advantages and constraints. These need
a thorough debate prior to taking any decision. It should be kept in mind from the beginning
that laws and policies are a means of supporting and facilitating conservation, and not tools for
imposing external powers and creating local conflicts.

Conclusion
This practice of conservation along with commercial linkages at a local level seems to be an
interesting system and needs to be studied especially for its sustainability. Our study points
towards a possibility of continued protection to the sacred grove and the palm species coupled
with the religious and economic aspects. Ajeevali has a wide range of landscape elements and
land-use patterns. From the results of this one-year study (conducted as part of completion of
Masters programme in the year 2004-5) it is clear that Ajeevali sacred grove needs a long-term
conservation plan. However the grove does not exist in isolation, rather it is a part of the overall
village landscape and land-use pattern. Therefore, conservation of the grove is also very closely
linked to the conservation of the surrounding landscape elements and linked cultural aspects. A
study of this kind was useful to understand this link between the conservation of the grove and
economic, ecological and cultural fabric of Ajeevali village. An effective step ahead would be to
use the results of this study to generate a village-level as well as larger debate to arrive at an
appropriate conservation model for Ajeevali as a whole.

This case study has been compiled from the following documents: Supriya Goturkar and Radhika
Kanade ‘A study of biodiversity, its use and conservation in rural lifescape at Ajeevali sacred
grove, Pune, India’, dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of Master’s degree in Biodiversity
(2005); Supriya Goturkar, Radhika Kanade, Neema Pathak, Mukul Mahabaleshwarkar and
Ankur Patwardhan, ‘Abstract – Ajeevali village, a case study of socio-economic strength leading
to self-governed conservation’, for the Society for Conservation Biology (2005).

For more details contact:

Radhika Kanade
680/2, Sant Eknath Nagar
Bibvewadi
Pune 411037
Ph: 9422530384
E-mail: radhika_kanade@vsnl.net

Supriya Goturkar
RANWA, C – 26 / 1,
Ketan Heights, Kothrud,
Pune – 411038
Ph : 9881434410
E-mail: Supriya_r_g@yahoo.co.in

Endnotes
1
M.G. Gadgil and V.D. Vartak, The Sacred Groves of Western Ghats in India, Economic Botany, 1 (1976), pp.
152–60.
2
A researcher from Pune who had started ‘Save Western Ghats Movement’ around the same time.
3
V.D. Vartak, Tadamadanchi Palmsrushti (Pune, Continental Publication, 2001).
4
M.G. Gadgil and V.D. Vartak, ‘Sacred Groves of India – A Plea for Continued Conservation’, Journal of Bombay
Natural History Society, 72(2) (1974), pp. 198 - 205.
 CCA/Mah/CS11/Pune/Mangaon/Sacred grove

Mangaon village, Pune

Background
Mangaon village is located in Velhe Taluka of Pune District, Maharashtra. This village is remotely
situated in the catchment area of the Panshet reservoir along the Western Ghats. At a distance
of 70 km from Pune city, the village can be approached by the state transport buses till Panshet
(30 km) and by launch there onwards. In the monsoons, this village gets water-locked on all sides
and is inaccessible by road. This area receives a total annual rainfall of approximately 5000 mm.
Temperatures range from a low of 9°C in winter to a maximum of 40°C in summer. The village
is surrounded by the Western Ghats on one side and the backwaters of Panshet Reservoir on
the other. This is mainly a forest ecosystem situated on the crestline of the Western Ghats. The
forest under protection is a sacred grove that is revered by the villagers of Mangaon since times
immemorial. There are still many sacred groves and protected patches of Reserve Forest along the
Western Ghats of Maharashtra (northern Sahyadris), which form a corridor between Bhimashankar
and Koyna wildlife sanctuaries in Maharashtra.
The area of the sacred grove is 18 ha and is legally a reserved forest (RF) under the jurisdiction
of the forest department. The main communities residing in Mangaon are the marathas, dhangars,
donger kolis and mahadeo kolis. The total population of the village is 450. The main source of
income is agriculture. The total livestock population is approximately 150. Many from the younger
generation migrate to cities like Mumbai and Pune in search of employment. Villagers occasionally
extract fuelwood and other forest products from the sacred grove. However, the percentage is
negligible and does not greatly affect the ecosystem. The villagers also derive income from the sale
of bamboo planted around their houses. This bamboo is sold to the contractors who collect bamboo
from the entire village and from neighbouring villages. Wood of narkya and amruta is similarly
collected and sold in a market at Bhor.

Towards community conservation

People have been conserving the grove since time immemorial. There are no written records of
the time for which this grove has been protected, but villagers maintain that their ancestors have
been protecting it for at least 600 years. People seldom collect fuelwood from the sacred grove.
Collection from the grove is largely restricted to dead and dried wood that has fallen down. No
trees are felled in the grove. Non-timber forest produce such as garbi, hirda, beheda and shikekai
are collected occasionally.
There is a bhagat (religious caretaker) appointed to look after the temple inside the sacred
grove. He belongs to the Mahadev Koli tribe. He is responsible for performing regular rituals for
the deity. The responsibility of protecting the grove lies with the entire village and there is no
specific body to manage it. An annual festival of the deity is celebrated by the surrounding villages.
Contributions for the celebrations are collected and the bhagat is paid a salary from this money.
The government has not been directly involved with the management, nor does it have any known
management plans for the area.

Impacts of community conservation

case studies - maharashtra

In the landscape of Panshet catchment, Mangaon sacred grove stands out. Trees with large girth
and huge lianas such as Entada, Diploclasia glaucescens and kadu karanda have made the canopy
virtually impermeable to the ground.

This case study has been compiled based on a questionnaire answered by Sambhaji Jagtap of
Mangaon on 1 May 2001.

For more information contact:

Sambhaji Jagtap
Datta Nivegune, Village Mangaon
Taluka Velhe, District Pune, Maharashtra
409
 CCA/Mah/CS8/Dhule/Baripada/Forest protection

Baripada village, Dhule

Background
Baripada village is a part of Sakri Block in Dhule district of Maharashtra. The village is surrounded
by a 445 ha forest supporting a rich vegetation composed of species such as teak or saag,
devakhumba, palas, pangara, ain, kumbha, moha or mahua, neem or kadulimb, karwand and
others. Wild animals found here are panther, Indian wolf, black-naped hare, fox, monitor lizard,
and others.

Towards community conservation

Towards the end of the 1980s and in the early
1990s, illegal felling of teak and other plants
was done mainly by outsiders. Villagers noticed
that the hill near the village, which had always
been green, was turning into a barren and dry
sand pile. This began to worry the villagers. In
addition, Chaitram Pawar, a youth in the village,
was noticing some other harmful effects.
The supply of fuelwood had become irregular.
A third of the 35 wells in the village had gone
dry. Forest degradation was leading to a number
of other social problems. In the absence of other
livelihood options, women had turned to liquor
production as a source of secondary income. Baripada village tank Photo: Milind Thatte
Liquor consumption led to social disquiet in the
village.
Pawar felt the need to do something about the situation in his village. Gajanan Pathak, who was
then associated with a local NGO Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram, extended his support. Subsequently the
forest department (FD) also started helping Pawar in his initiatives. The forest department extended
their Joint Forest Management (JFM) scheme to the village in 1998. JFM has subsequently been
also extended to other villages in the vicinity. Thus a large contiguous patch of forest is currently
under protection by different villages.
Pawar mobilised the villagers and urged them to take action. He pointed out that if deforestation
continued, their access to dry wood, fruits and other minor forest produce would get affected. In a
village gathering on 23 May 1993, a local informal forest protection committee (FPC) was set up to
protect the forest. Initially some villagers were sceptical about this initiative. They were then roped
in as important position holders in the FPC. Pawar was elected the chairman of the FPC.
It was decided that the FPC would not have any permanent members. The idea was that each
family would have the chance to send a representative to the committee in turn. Thus all the
case studies - maharashtra

families in the village had a stake in the entire process.

The people of Baripada have initiated a plant diversity register process in October 2004 to
monitor the plants found in their forests. They have identified 14 different sites from the forest and
initiated vegetation mapping through a 100 sq m quadrant.

Rules and Regulations

The rules and regulations for forest use were announced in the weekly markets and in all
neighbouring villages. The rules included:
1. Anyone found destroying or taking anything from the forest would be punished as per the rules
framed for regulating human and cattle activity in the area.

389
390 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

2. Only the inhabitants of the village were

eligible for extracting resources from the
forest, if at all.
Two elderly people in the village would work
as watchmen and report to the FPC. The
watchmen would be paid Rs 100 per month
and would be changed every year.
3. Each family would pay Rs 3 in cash or 7 kg of
grain to generate funds required to pay the
watchmen.
4. Any person found removing any plant or
animal material without permission would
be penalised Rs 151 per headload and Rs
751 if taken out of the forest in any other Board of the village development committee
manner. For cattle grazing in the forest the Photo: Milind Thatte
fine would be Rs 1000.
5. If someone other than the watchmen caught the culprit, then an award of Rs 501 would be
given to the person.
6. Farmers whose lands lay next to the protected community forest would have the moral
responsibility to report any theft they may encounter.
7. Nobody from within or outside the village would be allowed to enter the forest with a bullock
cart for any reason.
Subsequently, there have been some changes in the rules and regulations. For example:
1. The neighbouring villagers are now allowed to extract some resources for social and religious
purposes but only if the permission had been sought in advance from Baripada village.
2. For 30 days in a year 50 acres of forestland is given for grazing. The area allocated for grazing
is changed every year. Grazing for sheep and goats is not allowed.
3. Villagers are allowed to remove dead/dried wood on social occasions or community gatherings
(deaths, weddings, etc). In addition one month during winter (February/March) is a free time
again, when only villagers are allowed to remove fuelwood.
The Indian government recognised the effort of the village by awarding it Rs 1,00,000. This
amount was used in starting a village level jaggery-making unit. This unit now employs 25 young
men from the village.
Inspired by Jan Seva Foundation, environment education camps for local school children are
organised in community protected forests. In these programmes the schoolchildren get acquainted
with local plants, including medicinal plants, birds and animals.
In 2003, Pawar helped the village women start a fish-farming cooperative using the common
village pond. Jan Seva Andolan helped in the process. The women are now pleased as they can
give up making liquor. Since alternatives are now available, the women have taken a strong stand
on drinking alcohol. Men are now afraid of coming home drunk. Villagers have also undertaken
cultivation of a common forest nursery as part of joint watershed development activities.

Impacts of community effort

Social
1. Collective action in the village has now increased appreciably. Marriages are also organised
collectively on an auspicious day, thereby reducing expenses.
2. The village has developed a more inclusive method of conflict resolution. One person from each
family has to participate in resolution of conflicts, irrespective of the nature of the issue.
3. Jan Seva Foundation and Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram have helped villagers in community-based
development activities, like building improved toilets, setting up kitchen gardens that use
recycled water, and so on.
 Maharashtra 391

Ecological
4. The number of thefts from the forest has substantially reduced.
5. Illicit extraction of forest resources by the villagers has completely stopped.
6. Protection and conservation efforts have helped reduce water run-off.
7. The forest department has legitimised the informal village protection group under its Joint
Forest Management (JFM) scheme.
8. Species like Tectona grandis, korfad, ghaypaat, among others, have been planted under JFM
in the community protected forest.
According to Chaitram Pawar, plant and animal life has increased in the forest, both in terms of
number and variety. More importantly, not only has Baripada become self-sufficient in terms of
meeting its fuelwood and water needs, it can even supply water to surrounding villages.

Box 1
Community action fosters the ‘we’ spirit in the village
Gajanan Pathak recalls an interesting incident. The forest havaldar (forest guard) had hired
some outsiders to collect wood from the forest for him. The villagers came to know about
this and questioned the havaldar. Embarrassed, her asked for a transfer and soon moved out
of the region. Pathak says, ‘What was interesting about this incident was the fact that the
villagers did not shy away from confronting the havaldar, who usually behaved like a king.
They could question him because of their own unity and because they felt that he should not
go unpunished, as this would set a precedent.’

This article is based on inputs from Gajanan Pathak and Chaitram Pawar and documentation
done by Shailesh Shukla and other members of SRISTI team in Honey Bee, Vol. 15 (2) April-
June 2004. For more recent information contact Neema Pathak at neema.pb@gmail.com

For more information contact:

Chaitram Deochand Pawar
At: Baripada
Post Shendwad
Block Sakri
District Dhule 424306
Ph: (c/o Madhav Pawar, Pimpalner, 02561-
223930)

Dr. Anand G. Phatak, MD

Dr. Hedgewar Rugnalaya
Garkheda, Aurangabad 431 005
Ph: 0240-360106 Check dams made by villagers in the protected forest
case studies - maharashtra

Mob: 9822435505 Photo: Milind Thatte

 CCA/Mah/CS3/Chandrapur/Belgata/Joint forest management

Belgata village, Chandrapur

Background
The story of Belgata is a unique narrative of the villagers of a tribal village that overcame its
vices, particularly alcoholism, and organized themselves for the development of the village as well
as individuals. Located in Mul taluka of Chandrapur District, this village lies 9 km from the taluka
headquarters.
This is a forest ecosystem with young trees, plants and shrubs that have been planted here in
the past 8 years. The total area conserved is 350 acres and is legally categorised as reserved
forests (RF), under the jurisdiction of the forest department (FD). Species like teak or saag, hirda,
rohan, yen, sesam, tiwas, tendu, charoli and Amla can be seen here. Indian peafowl were once
abundant but are no longer found. Avian fauna like parakeets, sparrows, pigeons, owls, wildfowl
and waterfowl are found. Quails, cranes and Indian rock Python are some of the wild animals found
in these forests.
The total population of the village is 640 with the majority community being the tribals, who
comprise 95 per cent of the population. The other communities residing here are the beldars, kunbis
and mahars (Scheduled Caste). The main sources of income of the villagers are dairy farming,
working as agricultural labourers, and employment with the railways. The livestock consists of 500
cows, 250 bulls, 70 buffaloes and 500 goats.
The villagers depend on the forest for most of their biomass requirements such as fodder, fuel,
food, fodder, timber for house construction and agricultural implements, and so on. Apart from
Belgata, 19 other villages depend on the same forest for their timber, fuelwood and fodder needs.
Before protection, uncontrolled extraction and illicit felling had almost completely destroyed the
forest. The forest department could do nothing to stop the destruction. There were many stories
where the villagers would tie up the government forest guard on duty to a tree and steal timber.
Alcoholism and domestic disputes were a way of life.

Towards community conservation

The first step of awareness about the issues came to the villagers in the 1970s due to the effort of
a tribal villager V.S. Triptiwar. This 65 -year old was greatly influenced by leaders like Jayaprakash
Narayan and Vinoba Bhave and had participated in many of their movements. He used the method
of saam daam dand bhed to eradicate alcoholism in the village. These are the four methods of
dealing with alcoholism as successfully practised by Anna Hazare in the village of Ralegan Siddhi
in Maharashtra. The four words mean prohibition through persuasion, coercion, fine and if nothing
works, then punishment. He targeted the youth of the village and motivated them to persuade
their fathers to stop drinking. Awareness camps were conducted and help was sought from the
forest department (FD). Slowly the villagers gave up the bottle and began to spend more time in
farming and forest protection activities. Once the village was rid of alcoholism, their awareness
about the issues facing the village increased. By 1990-1 they realised that the forests of Belgata
had degraded so badly that they may not be able to support the needs of the future generations.
In 1992, the forest department introduced the Joint Forest Management (JFM) scheme to the
case studies - maharashtra

villagers. Awareness programs were organized with visual demonstrations and educational groups
were formed. Camps for water conservation were also organized by the FD in order to raise
awareness. By September 1992, JFM started in Belgata and a van sangharakshak samiti (VSS) was
formed for the management and protection of 350 acres of forest. Three other groups that exist in
the village—the mahila gat (women’s group), gram sabha (village assembly) and the Bhajan Gat
(community religious singing group)—also participated in forest protection.
The VSS is a 11-member committee, of which 4 members are women (the forester is the member-
secretary). It is mandatory that decisions are taken in the presence of 70 per cent of the villagers.
The village has decided that 10-20 people would patrol the forest every day. Some of the rules that
have been established by consensus in the village include:
• Extraction of fuelwood and timber for agricultural implements is prohibited in the protected
372
 Maharashtra 373

area.
• Grazing is prohibited and villagers are encouraged to replace their goats with high-yielding
buffaloes.
Violators of the rules are fined by both the VSS and the FD. The stolen timber is impounded
by the FD and auctioned at a later date. Of the amount earned at the auction, 50 per
cent is given to the VSS. In addition, the VSS takes up community development
work with voluntary community labour contribution (shramdan). The village
women also patrol the forest and have on several occasions been instrumental
in apprehending timber thieves.
As per the JFM scheme the villagers are entitled to a 50 per cent share if
any resource extraction is carried out by the department after 10 years of
protection offered by the villagers. The villagers requested the FD to also
include the other villages in the sharing of fuelwood and bamboo.
Apart from JFM, the village has also adopted the concept of gramdaan.1
In this concept, all the farmers have to surrender one-twentieth portion of
their landholdings to the gram sabha for community use and management.
Also, they are bound to sell their lands only within the village, thus preventing
any outside presence.

Impacts of community effort

Since the commencement of protection, the forest has regenerated and the
villagers no longer have a deficit of timber. The forest has flourished and the
availability of a certain kind of local species dikemali, which is used as fuelwood
by the villagers, has increased. Ample fodder has increased milk production and
the overall income of every villager has improved.
There has been an increase in the water table, which has proved beneficial for
agriculture. Increase in the bird population has kept a check on the pests, further
benefiting agricultural production.
The villagers feel a sense of pride towards their forest and share an amicable
relationship with the FD. Their efforts received a boost when the media highlighted
their efforts and they won an award of Rs 1 lakh for their protection efforts.

Opportunities and constraints

With the increase in forest cover, the population of wild animals has also gone up, particularly
the wild boars. Wild boars cause serious crop damage, leading to resentment among the villagers
against them. There does not exist any policy to compensate the villagers for such damages.
The villagers also feel that instead of dividing fuelwood among all households equally, sharing
should be based on the size of each family. The decision regarding equal division is as per the JFM
rules.

This case study has been compiled based on a questionnaire answered by V.S. Triptivar from
Belgata on 21 August 2000 and an article by Vivek Deshpande, ‘Message in a bottle’, Indian
case studies - maharashtra

Express, 2 July 2000.

For more information contact:

V.S. Triptivar, Belgata.
Post Chicli, Taluka Mul,
District Chandrapur
Or
Anusayabai Sadashiv Todse,
Sarpanch, Belgata.
Post Chicli, Taluka Mul,
District Chandrapur
374 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

RFO
Forest Range Office,
Taluka Sidevahi
District Chandrapur

Mahadeo Girlurkar,
‘Khoj’, c/o Shri P.M. Khandelwal,
Near Govind Lodge, Gujari Bazar,
Paratwada-444805

Endnotes
1
Villagers donate a part of their land for the common village good to carry out community activities, including
agriculture, regeneration, etc.
 CCA/Mah/CS4/Chandrapur/Chorati/Forest protection

Chorati village, Chandrapur

Background
Chorati village is situated close to the Nagpur-Brahmapuri road in Brahmapuri taluka
of Chandrapur District. The Adyaal Tekdi bus stop is 4 km away from the village. It is
an Adarsh Gaon (ideal village), where villagers are involved in various activities along
with conservation practises, making the village self-sufficient to some extent.
The forest surrounding the village is dry and moist deciduous, supporting rich
floral diversity. Some of the commonly found trees are teak, ain, beheda, tendu,
anjan, jambhul, moha or mahua, etc. Among the major animals found here
are tiger, leopard, leopard cat, sambar, spotted deer, barking deer, black-
naped hare, wild dogs or dhole and common mongoose. The total area under
conservation is 560 ha.
Many communities like the Hindus, Buddhists and Adivasis (tribals) inhabit the village, which has
a total of 175 households. The total population of the village is 1030. The total livestock population
is 700, with 400 cattle, 200 sheep and 100 buffaloes.

Towards community conservation

Forest conservation began in 1993, initiated by the gram sabha under the influence of gaon
ganrajya samiti (village self-rule committee) and the adarsh gram nirman samiti (model village
development committee). The gram sabha (village council) is the main decision-making body in
the village and decisions are taken by consensus. An adivasi is the village head.
The gram sabha is also responsible for conservation and management of the village forest.
Besides the gram sabha, the adarsha gram nirman samiti and six mahila bachat gats (womens’
savings groups) are also involved with forest conservation.
The gram sabha has an executive committee for day-to-day functioning. This committee has
five members, out of which two are women. However, all major decisions are taken in the gram
sabha meeting by the entire village. All the families actively participate in the decision-making and
implementation, and enjoy equal share in the resource benefits.
The villagers have to pay a yearly amount of Rs 50 to gain access to fuelwood from the forest.
Under the Adarsh Gaon Yojana,1 56 acres out of the 560 acres of land was afforested with species
of various forest fruit trees and indigenous trees of economic importance such as teak, Terminalia
tomentosa, Terminalia bellerica, bamboo, tamarind, etc. Besides forest protection, the gram sabha
imposed a ban on alcohol consumption. Under the yojana, 165 gobar-gas plants were introduced in
175 households, 13 latrines were constructed and family planning was introduced in the village.

Impacts of community effort

case studies - maharashtra

After the protection of the forest was initiated, villagers now have abundant resources required for
agriculture and livelihood. Fodder availability has increased, in turn increasing the milk production.
According to the villagers, wild creepers, medicinal plants, insects, mammals and avian populations
have increased in the area. The conservation efforts have helped improve the wild habitat for
animals ranging from tiger to mongoose that are found in these forests.
The ban on alcohol has reduced the number of domestic fights in the village. Since the village
now enjoys nistari (customary) rights in their village, royalty which was earlier given to the FD
for use of forests now remains with the villagers. Many internal conflicts are now being resolved
internally, without depending on the external judicial system.

375
376 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Opportunities and constraints

The relationship with the FD is riddled with friction and political neglect. Inspite of this the
villagers are determined to keep the conservation effort going. The major reason for the success
of this initiative has been the feeling of unity in the village and the sense of belonging towards the
conserved forest. This can be illustrated by an incident in June 1999 when the District Collector
arrested 41 villagers and imprisoned them for 45 days, after an agitation. During this time the rest
of the village looked after the families of the 41 villagers.
The gram sabha plans for the future are to distribute 150 acres of land to the village landless.

This report has been prepared by Mahadeo Girlurkar of the NGO Khoj, in March 2001. We are
extremely grateful to Ajay Dolke, ‘Shrujanpod’, Yavatmal District, Maharashtra.

For more information contact:

Mahadeo Girlurkar,
‘Khoj’ c/o Shri P.M. Khandelwal,
Near Govind Lodge, Gujari Bazar,
Paratwada 444805

Endnotes
1
A scheme of the state government aimed at encouraging and financially supporting villagers carrying out outstanding
social and economic development in their villages.
 CCA/Mah/CS5/Chandrapur/Lakhapur/Forest protection

Lakhapur village, Chandrapur

Background
Lakhapur village is situated in Brahmapuri taluka of Chandrapur district in Maharashtra. A dry-
and moist-deciduous forest surrounds this village with species like khair, dhawada, sehma, saag,
mahua, neem, bel, anjan, mini, babul, tamarind, mango, bahawa, rohan, shendri, tendu, sahu,
etc. Some of the big mammals found here include Indian wolf, spotted deer or chital, wild boar
and jungle cat.
The total human population of the village is 510, living in 100 households. The main communities
include the bhois, gonds, kumbis and nalivis. Buddhism and Hinduism are the two main religions
practiced in the village.
Agriculture is the main occupation of the villagers, rice being the main crop. Other crops grown
here are pulses and wheat. The secondary occupations are livestock rearing and agricultural labour.
The livestock population is 250 cows and 100 buffaloes.
The villagers are dependent on the forest for fuelwood, wood for agricultural implements and
housing, medicinal plants and fodder. Honey and resin, and mahua, mango, tamarind, biba and
charoli fruits, are extracted for livelihood.
Legally this forest is under the jurisdiction of the revenue department and nistari (customary
use) rights remain with the villagers.

Towards community conservation

In 1955, when one of the villagers of Lakhapur went into the forest to collect fuelwood, he was
beaten up by some outside villagers. This angered the Lakhapur villagers. They decided to take
charge of their forest so that an incident like this would not be repeated.
In 1956, a forest area of 600 acres (240 ha) was selected by common consensus of the village
for protection. A forest cooperative society called Gram Swarajya Jungle Sahakari Sanstha was
established to manage and protect the forest. Though the village got rights over the forest in 1956,
actual work began under the guidance of Gurudev Geetacharya Tukaram Dada of Adiyal Tekdi in
1962.
The cooperative is made up of an elected 9-member team, which includes the president, vice-
president and secretary. Two villagers patrol the forest and are paid Rs 150 per month. The gram
sabha and the Forest Cooperative together take all major decisions, resolve conflicts and protect
the forest. Neighbouring villagers who used to hunt and steal firewood from the protected forest
have been caught and punished. The villagers also take fire control measures.
Each family pays a sum of Rs 50 annually to the cooperative for forest management. Funding for
activities like afforestation comes from fines. Fuelwood, fodder, timber, etc. are distributed equally
among the villagers.

Impacts of community effort

case studies - maharashtra

Protection has helped regeneration of the forest understorey. Fire control, regulated removal of
dried leaves, etc. increased the humus in the forest. Villagers claim that soil fertility has increased,
soil erosion has been checked and moisture levels have gone up. The increased water table level
has increased the water in wells and surrounding waterbodies. The overall biodiversity of the forest
is claimed to have shown a marked increase. Encroachments on village common land and forests
have been brought under control.
The villagers benefited greatly from the increase in the availability of fuelwood, fodder and NTFP
in the forest. Expenses that the villagers would incur to purchase this forest produce is saved.
Agriculture has improved, as has the dairy production. Time that was earlier spent on searching
for and gathering fuelwood is now spent in looking after their fields and other work. Overall health
benefits have been seen along with increase in income. Conflicts between them and neighbouring
villagers have also reduced.
377
378 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The feeling of unity among the villagers and the sense of belonging to the forest has increased.
The decision-making powers of the villagers have been enhanced and they now realize the
importance of self-governance.

This case study has been contributed by Mahadeo Girlurkar of the NGO Khoj, in March 2001.
We are extremely grateful to Ajay Dolke, ‘Shrujanpod’, Yavatmal District, Maharashtra, for his
useful comments.

For more information contact:

Mahadeo Girlurkar,
‘Khoj’, c/o Shri P.M. Khandelwal,
Near Govind Lodge, Gujari Bazar,
Paratwada 444805.
 CCA/Mah/CS6/Chandrapur/Saigata/Forest regeneration

Saigata village, Chandrapur

Background
Saigata is a small village situated in the Brahmapuri block of Chandrapur district in the western
Indian state of Maharashtra. For over twenty years this village has protected 280 ha of its
surrounding forests. The population of 426 in the village consists of people of various castes and
religions and also includes tribals.
The protected forest patch has a large water reservoir on one side. The patch of forests to the
southern end is protected by the neighbouring Lakhapur village; on all other sides virtually no
forests remain. Saigata forests are mainly dry deciduous forests with tree species like lendia, saja,
ain, teak, bija, mahua, and charoli.
The population of Saigata village is 426. The eight communities residing here include dalit Buddhists,
gonds, dhivars, govaris, manas, malis, lohars and kunbis. According to official classification, these
belong to scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, nomadic tribes and other backward castes. In the
year 2000 there were 88 households in the village. The main source of livelihood for the community
is agriculture and employment as agricultural labourers. Some (mainly the younger generation)
are employed outside the village.
Forests protected by Saigata villagers are legally classified as Protected Forest (PF), under the
Indian Forest Act, 1927. The rights over forest produce in this forest are as per the Nistar Patrak,1
1956.

Towards community conservation

After independence, the authority to oversee land matters and nistar (forest resource) rights of
people shifted from the jagirdar (as this region was under the jagirdari system2) to the Revenue
Department. The control over granting access to forest resources—firewood, minor forest produce,
etc.—now lies with the talathi (the land records officer) through the Nistar Patrak. The overall
management of the forest lies with the forest department.
Aided by a corrupt administration, timber started being illegally extracted by outsiders from this
forest. The villagers watched helplessly as the forest was gradually being denuded. Soon residents
from a neighbouring village, Mayar, started selling firewood from the forest. A time came when some
of the villagers in Saigata themselves started selling firewood. Around the early 1970s the forests
were all but wiped out. Due to the extreme degradation of the forest, livelihood options based on
collection of non-timber forest produce
(NTFPs) such as mahua flowers, tendu
leaves, gum, etc. were no longer possible,
and the availability of forest resources for
personal consumption—fuelwood, fodder
etc.—were also affected.
In 1973 a krushak charcha mandal
case studies - maharashtra

(farmers’ discussion society) was

established in the village under the
leadership of a dalit,3 Suryabhan
Khobragade. The aim of this group
was to initiate reforms to improve the
agricultural productivity in the village.
This mandal also had a kabaddi team
and a dramatics group, and served as a
useful platform to bond people together.
The synergy which emerged from these
activities also led to the formation of the
Nabhovani Shetkari Mandal (a farmers’ Villagers of Saigata in community protected forest
collective) and a library. Photo: Ashish Kothari
379
380 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

With the evolution of the krushak charcha mandal came the realisation that it was critical to
conserve the forests for future survival needs of the village, and a special gram sabha (village
council) meeting was called on 31 March 1979. Khobragade stressed the relationship between the
forest, land and water, and called on the villagers to protect the forests. The message was well
received and a unanimous resolution was passed by the gram sabha to protect their forests.
The villagers started patrolling the forests to stop the removal and sale of timber and firewood.
It was initially decided that everyday two villagers would patrol the forests and stop the wood-
sellers. This was a tough task, as many people from Saigata itself were engaged in these activities
for their livelihood and were not ready to give this up. But the village community decided that
they would first tackle the people from their own village before they stopped the wood-sellers
from other villages. Though they eventually managed to wean the Saigata villagers away from
selling firewood, information is not available on whether concrete alternative livelihood options
were offered to them then. The surrounding villages were more difficult to tackle, but by now
the villagers had grown in strength and managed to deal effectively with the timber thieves even
though they received death threats. The patrolling often involved confiscating axes and ropes from
these people.
The conservation initiative had a minor hiccup in the period around 1982-3 when there was timber
felling by outsiders with the help of a certain section of the village itself. This strife continued for
two years. But the villagers recovered from this and renewed their resolve to conserve the forests
after another special gram sabha meeting called by Khobragade. They formulated certain rules
in their village, which included charaibandi (ban on grazing), kurhadbandi (ban on use of axes),
nasbandi (population control) and a ban on sale of any form of wood. Access to basic forest
resources was available after consulting the gram sabha.
Though the village had strengthened itself considerably by the mid-80s, the struggle was far
from over. In 1982, they had to take on the forest department itself. The local department officials
confiscated the grass bundles which the villagers had cut for use in their homes, even though the
grass had regenerated only as a result of the protection efforts of the community. But the villagers
met the Divisional Forest Officer of Chandrapur. The DFO asked villagers by what right were they
claiming to protect the forest. Villagers responded in writing saying that it was the responsibility
of all villagers to protect the government forests in their vicinity. Eventually, the grass was freed
and the Department stopped questioning the village authority to protect the forests. The villagers
got their forest boundaries demarcated clearly by the department on the ground. Around the same
time a major battle had to be fought during the construction of a road coming to the village (the
Khed-Saigata road). The 650 labourers engaged for this work were exerting tremendous pressure
on the forest. The villagers guarded the forest round the clock during this period and faced many
confrontations, several of them violent.
In the late 1980s, the village decided to keep two paid chowkidars to guard the forest. These were
chosen from the village and contributions of Rs 10, 20
or 30 (depending on the economic status) were taken
from the villagers. The villagers also imposed a ban on
hunting in the area and vigils became stricter as the
people fought fires, confiscated axes and bullock carts
of thieves, and faced armed robbers and on occasions
even hostile relatives.
It is important to remember that though the initial
catalytic movement was provided by the Krushak
Charcha Mandal and later the gram sabha was used to
give a call for forest protection, neither of these really
developed as strong institutional structures. Though
the village fiercely guarded their forest, the village
depended largely on the guidance of Khobragade
rather than any village institutions.
In 1993, the villagers were approached by the
Range Forest Officer, Nagbhid, to join the official
Joint Forest Management (JFM) scheme of the
Government. The villagers agreed to be a part of
this and a van samrakshan samiti (VSS) (Forest
Protection Committee) was elected for this purpose.
Soon plantations, pit digging, etc. were taken up,
Women collecting fallen twigs for firewood at providing employment opportunities to some of the
Saigata Photo: Ashish Kothari villagers. This was for the plantation work, which was
 Maharashtra 381

undertaken over 125 ha. As this partnership with the government completed eight years in 2000,
Khobragade and a few others with whom the author interacted felt JFM has strengthened their
initiative of twenty years by giving it a legal backing. The villagers are also expecting to reap the
benefits of their initiative, as some of the forest produce will be harvested, giving them their 50 per
cent share as per the benefit-sharing mechanism. In 1994 three wings of the forest department—
Working Plan, Social Forestry and Territorial—sat with the VSS members in Chandrapur to draft
the micro-plan, but the villagers expressed a lack of their proactive involvement in the drafting of
the working plan. The micro-plan should ideally have been drafted in the village with maximum
participation of the villagers and not in a faraway place like Chandrapur where a only few village
members could have made a small contribution.
Initially, some conflicts were also created with the neighbouring villages as Saigata villagers
did not allow extraction of fuelwood. Eventually, people moved to using agricultural residue and
planting fuelwood trees on their agricultural fields for fuelwood to overcome the scarcity.
In 1993 grazing was stopped in the entire protected forest. Between 1994-5, to encourage
regeneration, only rotational grazing was allowed. Subsequently the entire forest has been opened
for grazing, except where new plantations are taken up. In the initial years the villagers had
reduced the number of goats per family. The number of goats has now increased again because of
a government scheme under which loans are given for buying goats.
It is important to note that the forest produce (wood, grass, etc.) is presently used for personal
consumption only. Since 1989, there has been no commercial exploitation of the forest produce by
the villagers. However, they allow the neighbouring villages of Uchli and Kaleta to collect mahua,
charoli and palas leaves for their business of making leaf-plates, as they have done traditionally.

Impacts of community effort

This initiative has helped the village achieve local empowerment. ‘It has united us, increased the
esteem of the village community, and helped us overcome barriers of class, caste and religion,’ says
Khobragade. Achieving social equity as part of the effort towards forest conservation and equitably
sharing the benefits of the conserved forests have definitely been among the major achievements
of the community. This was clearly indicated in the 1970s—when the rest of Brahmapuri taluka
faced riots between Dalits and other castes, this village of eight different communities fought
together to conserve their forests under the leadership of a Dalit. Local empowerment has also
helped the villagers assert their rights and responsibilities.
According to the villagers the regeneration of the forest has facilitated the availability of basic
survival resources such as firewood, fodder, and so on. The water table has gone up, and while
earlier there was no water after January they now have enough drinking water as well as water for
irrigation. Villagers do not use water provided by the government and meet their entire drinking
water requirements from the two borewells in the village. Besides, the rise in the water table due
to forest conservation has helped improve agricultural productivity. In recent times some of the
works undertaken under the JFM scheme have also provided employment to the villagers. NTFP-
based livelihoods had once disappeared from the village, but from 2002 onwards mahua flowers
are being sold by the villagers.
A 1999 observation4 showed that most of the regeneration was actually coppice shoots that had
grown after the stumps of trees (that had been felled repeatedly in the past) were given adequate
protection. Amongst these coppicing trees were numerous other seedlings of various different
species. There were also thickets of the usual secondary growth species like kombal,
Flacourtia indica and different kinds of climbers. Villagers have carried out bamboo
case studies - maharashtra

plantations, which often do not succeed as the seedlings are uprooted by the wild
boars which feed on the rhizomes of the bamboo. According to the villagers,
the wild animals found in the area include leopard, spotted deer, barking
deer, black-naped hare, wild boar, jackal, Indian wolf, and various species
of birds and snake. According to a local professor, V.N. Mahajan, 70 species
of birds and 250 species of plants have been recorded from the protected
forests so far. Villagers also claim that in 2004, a gaur was sighted in the
fields close to the forest.
There have been no forest fires since 1980. Fires are extinguished as
soon as they start. Controlling the fires along with regulated grazing
has greatly helped in the regeneration.
382 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Opportunities and constraints

While the forests around Saigata stand testimony to the efforts of the villagers, there are several
challenges before the villagers.
The villagers feel they need to strengthen the gram sabha as an institution and also develop a
second line of leadership, as a large part of the effort has depended on the initiative and guidance
of Khobragade and remains till today an individual-driven effort.
While the villagers feel that the JFM programme has given legal backing to their conservation
initiative, it appears that it has not been internalised either by the villagers or the FD. Forest
protection even today is more an outcome of the informal efforts of the villagers rather than the
VSS. This could be due to several reasons, some of which are mentioned below:
1. The VSS is elected every five years and includes three women members, seven men and one
forester. The VSS has to yet establish itself as a strong institution. Interaction with some
members of the VSS indicated that the committee met very infrequently. Villagers felt a need
for it to meet more often. They also expressed the need for a more proactive participation of
the Forester, who is the Member-Secretary of the VSS. Forest related decisions are made in
the gram sabha rather than the VSS.
2. Another important issue is the need for sustained employment opportunities within the village.
As the youth look outwards for employment opportunities, it is difficult to gauge how this will
affect attitudes of people towards their natural resources in future. While the forest protection
initiative is old, one of the main reasons in people’s interest in the official JFM programme has
been the employment opportunities it provided, although temporarily. The JFM programme
is now facing serious monetary constraints to carry out its activities. This programme was
initially supported by a World Bank loan. This fund, however, is now over. Self-sustaining
livelihood opportunities have not really taken off: for example, the dairy farm project is yet
to start, almost three years after it was initiated. According to Khobragade, the VSS itself is
responsible for inertia on this front, as they have also not pushed the issue strongly enough.
3. A lack of proactive involvement of the villagers in the micro-planning for management of
the forests is another vital issue. This is in many ways linked to the weakness of the VSS.
As the commercial exploitation of the forests and subsequent sharing of benefits is slated to
begin, the need for active involvement of villagers in the planning process is vital to ensure
that their conservation initiative of 20 years is not undermined and that there is sustainable
exploitation.
The increasing wildlife populations have also brought with them increasing rates of crop damage.
The population of wild boars has increased considerably. Wild boars reportedly cause much damage
in the forests as well as to agriculture. In 2004 wild boars have been declared as pests by the
government and license-holders are allowed to kill damage-causing boars. However, the body of
the animal killed in this manner needs to be buried and cannot be consumed. The government has
also agreed to pay compensation for crop damage. Such compensation is paid based on a joint
assessment done by the sarpanch (elected political representative), forester (local forest officer) and
patwari (local revenue officer). However, no such compensation has been paid in the village so far.
On the one hand the villagers have been trying to control the goat and sheep populations in the
village; on the other, under a government scheme the villagers are being granted loans to buy
sheep and goats. This has resulted in the increase in the number of goats in the village now where
they had once nearly disappeared.
A very interesting feature to examine will be to compare the forests of Saigata and the
neighbouring forests of Lakhapur, which have also been protected by the village residents. It is
important to note that the forests of Lakhapur were never wiped out as were those of Saigata.
According to Khobragade, the Lakhapur forests are not protected as well as the Saigata forests,
but more detailed social and ecological investigations will have to be undertaken to examine this.
Some of the possible factors which might have been responsible for the Lakhapur forests surviving
the degradation the Saigata forests experienced could be the relative isolation from the main road
and less pressure from other villages.

This information has been compiled based on the following sources: Neeraj Vagholikar, ‘Saigata:
A forest reborn’, Hindu Survey of the Environment, 2000; Suryabhan Khobragade, ‘Ek Gaon
Saigata’ (Marathi), Note on the community conservation initiative of village Saigata (undated),
‘Above all differences’, Down to Earth, 30 April 2000; Questionnaire filled on 1 February 2000
by Suryabhan Khobragade; and Vivek Gour-Broome, ‘Note on first impressions of the ecology
of Saigata forests’ (2000), unpublished.
 Maharashtra 383

For more details contact:

Suryabhan Khobragade,
Village Saigata, Brahmapuri Block,
Chandrapur District,
Maharashtra, India.

Prof. V.N. Mahajan

A/6 Sharda Colony
Brahmapuri 441206
Dist. Chandrapur
Ph: 07177-272192

Endnotes
1
An official government document which lists out types and quantities of forest resources people can extract as their
customary right for bonafide personal use.
2
In the jagirdari system the state administration assigned a certain area to an individual, the jagirdar, as a favour.
The jagirdar collected the revenue from this area, with a portion going to the state.
3
A generic term for communities which have been traditionally the lowest castes in the Hindu caste system.
4
Unpublished report by Vivek Gour-Broome, independent biologist, Pune.

case studies - maharashtra

 CCA/Mah/CS7/Chandrapur/Satara Tukum/Forest protection

Satara Tukum village, Chandrapur

Background
Satara Tukum is a small tribal hamlet in Pombhurna taluka about 25 km from Chandrapur District
Headquarters. It falls under the Mul Forest Range of Chandrapur Forest Division. Legally the forest
under conservation are Reserve Forest. Forest department initiated the Joint Forest Management
(JFM) Programme here in November 1997. The forests of Satara Tukum once housed local species
like dhaoda, ain, kalam, chinchawa, tendu, etc. However, unrestricted grazing and illicit felling in the
past few decades left these forests largely degraded, although they still supported mammals such
as tigers and panthers. Under JFM the forests are now recovering their past glory. These forests
represent the last stretch of forests extending all the way to Tadoba-Andhari Tiger Reserve.

Towards community conservation

The villagers of Satara Tukum have been watching the degradation of their surrounding forests
and to some extent contributing to it. The general feeling among the villagers was that the forests
belonged to the government and the government had
the responsibility to protect them. Much of the protected
forest around the village had already been encroached
upon. Satara Tukum was brought under the World Bank-
sponsored forestry programme in 1997. Mr. Chaphekar
(Divisional Forest Officer) and Ms. Imtienla Ao (Assistant
Conservator of Forests) persuaded the villagers to join
the Joint Forest Management (JFM) scheme under this
programme. An agreement to this effect was made in the
gram sabha (village assembly) on 14 November 1997.
About 285 ha were allotted to the village community for
protection. A samiti (committee) was appointed, which
had 96 members—i.e., one member each from all the
96 households. These 96 members included 84 men and
12 women. Since the government resolution prior to
1998 required only one person per household in the JFM
committee, the Samiti is even today dominated by men,
and women’s representation comes only from the women
headed households. The executive committee consists
of 12 members, three of which are women (as per the
requirement under JFM resolution). The participation of
women members in the decision-making process is non-
Forest protection committee members
existent. The executive committee is elected every two
in Satara Tukum Photo: Ashish Kothari
years. After the appointment of the samiti, Imtienla Ao
prepared the micro-plan for the area which was approved by the samiti. As per the micro-plan the
FPC undertook the following activities to protect and manage the forests:
1. Forming groups of seven persons each, which would patrol the forests daily on a rotational
case studies - maharashtra

basis. The patrolling teams tried to convince hunters and others to stop their activities rather
than forcibly stopping them.
2. Prohibition on free grazing. Cattle grazing illegally in the plantation and regeneration areas
were impounded by the FPC.
3. Controlling illicit feeling, a serious problem facing these forests.
4. Appointment of a forest guard to look after the plantation area as well as the protected area.
5. Generation of employment through forestry works such as plantations, soil and moisture
conservation, and so on.
6. Those coming to the forests for headloads of fuelwood for sale were strictly warned or punished
(particularly those from other villages).
384
 Maharashtra 385

7. Soil erosion was effectively checked by building check-dams on various nallahs and big
gullies.
8. Raising plantations of bamboo, shiwan or gambhari, khair and teak or saag on 60 ha of degraded
area.
9. Giving loans to needy villagers to establish small cottage enterprises, such as vermicompost
plants, swing machines, dairy development, etc.
10. Various other schemes taken up to create alternative livelihoods for the villagers, such as
beekeeping, sewing-machine training for young village girls, dairy development activities,
development of medicinal plants in the village, etc.
11. Health and education were given importance with the introduction of toilets, bio-gas plants and
better educational facilities, all with FPC funds.
12. The women of FPC formed a mahila bachat gat (self-help group) in which they got 57 quintals
of rice in subsidy, which was distributed to each family in the village. The rice recovered from
each family was stored in a seed bank for use in the next year.
13. Youth in the village were organised to protect environment and study fauna and flora of the
village. A ‘Young Environmentalist’ movement was organised by a Nagpur-based NGO, the
Vidarbha Nature Conservation Society.
The FPC has an account jointly managed by the FPC and the forest department. This account
receives money from the forest department for various developmental activities. The profits from
catching and selling fish from a community fish-tank established under JFM also go to this account.
Sometimes various forestry works are carried out through voluntary work (shramadaan) by the
villagers and the amount meant for their payment is deposited in the FPC account. As of September
2004, the samiti had Rs. 1.26 lakh in its account. The Sarpanch (president) of the samiti and the
forest guard (member secretary of the samiti) are the joint signatories. Before making an expense
the samiti has to pass a resolution and the accounts are regularly announced at the meetings of
the samiti but not at the gram sabha. The funds in the account are used to give loans to farmers.
In the lean period, each member of the samiti gets a loan of Rs 1000. This loan is returned on 14
January (Makar Sankranti, the harvest festival) with 2 per cent interest. If the loan is not returned
on time, some property of the concerned person is mortgaged. These funds are also used for some
community activities, such as buying vessels for village functions, etc.
The effort was very successful till funding was available from the WB. However, after the
forestry scheme ended the government was not any longer as interested in the initiative. This
has demoralised the villagers; they are also not sure what kind of benefits they would eventually
get, because till 2004 no Memorandum of Understanding had been signed between the village and
the government. Lack of funding and lack of information at the village level of tapping various
government schemes has made it difficult for people to continue to patrol the forests at the
expense of daily wages that they would earn.
Bamboo harvesting from the protected forests was taken up in 2004 by the FD. Villagers, however,
were only paid daily wage labour. No royalty or share of the harvesting was paid. Initially, the villagers
refused to offer labour for bamboo harvesting because the paper mill was only paying Rs 2.60 per
bundle of bamboo. When villagers raised the point that for similar work the rate elsewhere was Rs
8 per bundle, the company decided to
get labourers from other villages. The
village put an embargo on the outside
labourers. They gave them food for 15
days but did not allow them to work.
case studies - maharashtra

Eventually, the company agreed to

pay Rs 3 per bundle. Considering that
there are few opportunities available
for employment, such incidents are
extremely discouraging for the village,
more so because they have protected
the forests for nearly a decade now.
The samiti is demanding that the
adjoining forest compartment should
also be handed over to the village for
protection. According to them, this will
Community fishing in reservoir, Satara Tukum
bring a larger area under protection and
Photo: Ashish Kothari
villagers would also benefit more when
386 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

any harvesting eventually takes place. In discussion in 2004, the local RFO and ACF agreed that
this could be done as there were no villages around. If the village would pass a resolution, this area
could be handed over to the samiti.

Impacts of community effort

1. Due to effective patrolling and protection, natural regeneration took place rapidly and within a
period of two years the forest has regenerated to its past glory with the return of wildlife such
as tiger and panther. This is shown clearly in the satellite imageries (see left) taken in years
1994 and 2004.
2. Hunting was prevalent earlier as the inhabitants of the village are largely tribals. According to
the villagers there is very little hunting in these forests now.
3. Villagers also claim that wild animal population has increased considerably. Animals like wild
dogs or dhole (seen in packs coming to drink water at the community tank), panthers, sloth
bears, chital or spotted deer and barking deer are sighted regularly by the villagers. 4-5
incidents of attacks by wild animals on human beings are reported every year. According to
the villagers these incidents have increased in last few years.
4. Before JFM was initiated in the village, forest encroachments were a major issue. No
encroachments have been recorded in the reserved forests by either the residents of Satara
Tukum or from other villages.
5. Due to protection, abundant grass was available in 1998 itself. The grass was enough to meet
the village requirement and also to supply to the victims from a flood-hit Orissa in 1999.
Similarly, in 2000, 3 tons of grass were supplied to Gorakshan Kendra at Nagpur and two tons
were used to thatch their own houses and to feed their own cattle.
6. Prior to JFM, crop loans were taken from moneylenders who would in turn exploit the farmers.
Considering this the FPC started giving loans to the needy. The interest collected would again
be pooled back into the FPC account.
7. Vermicompost, developed by one of the villagers, increased paddy yield by about 25 per cent.
So did the production of vegetables. Villagers noticed that this also considerably decreased
insect and pest attacks. These observations made the villagers use vermicompost during the
next crop season.
8. Encouraged by the success of JFM in the village, the Zilla Parishad of Chandrapur allocated
fisheries work in one of the tanks to the FPC for a period of 5 years. The profits from this also
go back to the FPC account.
9. Availability of daily wage labour, even though irregular, construction of a community hall to
conduct community functions, vessels, sound system, etc. for the village are also seen as a
benefit of being part of the programme by the villagers.
10. Adoption of JFM by the village seems to have made the villagers more aware of the virtues
of forest conservation. There has been a sea-change in the relationship between the forest
department and the villagers. The fear and antagonism that the villagers felt against the
department earlier is not felt anymore.
11. Funds available for fire extinguishing come to the village fund in Satara Tukum. This is a
unique experiment being tried at the behest of the local staff. During a personal communication
in 2004, the local RFO revealed that this experiment has not been tried anywhere else in
Maharashtra so far: ‘Since the villagers are protecting the forests against fire, this saves the
Department resources meant for fire extinguishing activities. This money has therefore been
allocated to the village fund.’

Opportunities and constraints

1. World Bank funding and JFM: This JFM initiative was started as part of the WB-sponsored
Maharashtra Forestry Project. The project came to an end in 2000. During a trip to the village
in 2004, it appeared that the project, while initiating JFM programme in various villages,
had not worked out an exit strategy. Once the funds came to an end the enthusiasm of the
department also diminished. Lack of funds made it difficult to carry on with employment-
generating schemes. For a village where land holdings are very small and daily wage is not
very easily accessible, it has become very difficult for villagers to forego a day’s wage to go
 Maharashtra 387

for forest patrolling. Villagers are right now continuing in the hope that some day income will
be generated from the forests for those who have helped protect it. However, villagers feel let
down by the Department. Satara Tukum which was once being portrayed as one of the best
examples of JFM is not a priority for the department since WB funds have exhausted.

Box 1
Funding opportunities for JFM in Satara Tukum
The local RFO confessed in 2004 that implementation of JFM requires funds: ‘This is the best
village in my range, but I don’t have funds to encourage them.’ He felt that there were a
number of local sources of funding which can be pooled together to support initiatives of this
kind. According to him some good sources of funding could be:
a. Bringing this range under the Forest Development Authority (FDA) of the government. Here
the Central Government funds for all development activities are pooled together at the district
level and can be allocated directly to the village institutions for implementation of forest and
social development schemes.
b.20 per cent of the revenue earned from confiscated material (material being illegally smuggled
out and confiscated) could be deposited in the village fund.
c.The Chief Secretary of Maharashtra has issued a circular stating that JFM villages should get
a priority for implementation of schemes under all line agencies.
d.In all forest areas in Maharashtra 10 per cent of sales proceeds from forest produce are
deposited by the forest department with the state government. The state government then
distributes this money to zilla parishads (District Councils) in the state. The Zilla Parishads are
expected to use this money for development of forests under their jurisdiction. This, however,
does not happen. The Range Forest Officer’s Association in Maharashtra has demanded in an
intervention in a High Court case that this money should be returned to the forest department
for forest development activities. Through this tax the state government earns about Rs 500
million per annum. The RFO felt that if this money could be returned to the Department,
programmes like JFM would benefit.
e. The RFO intends to construct bio-gas plants for all the families in the village under the
Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS) through the local panchayat office.

2. Lack of tenure security: Often villagers feel concerned that after all these years they may
not get the benefits from the forests. This fear emanates from the fact that after all these
years a Memorandum of Understanding has still not been signed between the villagers and
the Department. No records are being maintained about the harvest levels at the village level.
In addition to that, while the JFM Resolution of the state government earlier talked about an
understanding with the villagers for 30 years, an amendment in 2004 says that the agreement
will be for ten years only. Such changing policies make villagers insecure about their efforts.
3. Lack of information: Villagers indicate that they could do with information about various
government schemes for villages. They felt they needed support from the forest officials at
the divisional level to help them get such information, which will in turn help them generate
employment at the local level.
4. Institution building: In 1997 when the JFM committee was formed, only one member per
household was included in the committee. This immediately excluded women from the decision-
case studies - maharashtra

making process. Over the years the constitution of the committee has remained the same.
However, by the year 2004 a group of young people had started taking interest in the activities
of the committee. They also participate in forest patrolling. Since the young boys have been
to school, some of them also play an important role in the administration of the committee.
Pravin Chichdhare has in fact been included in the executive committee, even though he is not
a member of the general body of the Forest Protection Committee (FPC). The youth, therefore,
also wishes to be included in the FPC; however, the older members are reluctant to do this.
Their concern is that they have invested almost a decade in protecting the forests and now
if new members are included then the share of benefits from the forest harvest per member
would further reduce.
388 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Conclusion
During a village meeting in 2004 many villagers expressed concern that the accounts are not
being announced to the entire village. The FPC members clarified that many people do not come
for the meeting when these announcements are being made. In addition, alcoholism is still quite
prevalent in the village. It therefore becomes difficult to elicit effective participation, particularly if
the meetings are being organised in the evenings.
This brought home the reality that although forest protection by the village was very effective,
much more attention should have been paid to building institutional capacity and systems of
conflict resolution to ensure its long-term sustainability. Much of this could be done by facilitating
regular dialogues among the villagers and between the villagers and government and non-
government individuals from out side. A constant flow of information and regular dialogues could
help strengthen the village initiative.

This case study has been compiled from ‘Joint Forest Management. Satara Tukum’; A report
on the progress of JFM of the village on its 3rd anniversary (Chandrapur Forest Division, 2000).
The information was further updated after a field visit to the site by Neema Pathak and Ashish
Kothari of Kalpavriksh, Suryabhan Khobragade of Saigata village and Dilip Gode of Vidarbha
Nature Conservation Society in October 2004.
Information in the box is based on personal communication from Range Forest Officer of Mul
Range, Shri A.N.Tikhe, and others, during a field visit by Kalpavriksh members Ashish Kothari
and Neema Pathak in October 2004.

For more details contact:

Pravin Chichdhare
Village Satara-Tukum
Post Dabgaon
Tahsil Pombhurna
District Chandrapur
Maharashtra
India 441224
Ph: 07174 - 569626

Forest Guard
At and Post Chandrapur
Near Ram Nagar Thakkar Colony
Chandrapur

Range Forest Officer

Mul Forest Range
Chandrapur Forest Department
Chandrapur
Maharashtra
Ph: 07174 - 220404

Dilip Gode
Vidarbha Nature Conservation Society (VNCS)
Tidke Ashram, Ganeshpeth
Nagpur 440018
Maharashtra
Ph: 0712-22728942
Mob: 9822472660
 CCA/Mah/CS2/Buldhana/Botha/Forest protection

Botha village, Buldhana

Background
Botha, a small village in Khamgaon tehsil of Buldhana district in Maharashtra, is well-known for
its success in the Joint Forest Management Programme in Maharashtra, which was initiated by the
enthusiastic DFO Dr. Mohan Jha.
The village comes under Khamgaon Range in Buldhana Forest Division. This forest is classified as
a Class A forest and covers an area of 1510 ha. The village lies on the outskirts of the Dnyanganga
wildlife sanctuary, and part of the conserved forest falls within the sanctuary. The major tree
species found in the forest are ain, dhavada, palash and teak.
The total human population of Botha is 270, distributed in 63 households. The inhabitants
of the village are mainly Mahadeo Koli tribals and the scheduled castes. The total geographical
area of the village is 1662 ha. 49 per cent of the villagers are landless, while 51 per cent of the
population consists of marginal farmers growing crops like paddy and nachani. Livestock rearing
is also practiced. The total cattle population is 388, with 267 cows, 40 buffaloes and 81 bullocks,
and there are also some sheep and goats.
The villagers are dependent on the forest for fuelwood and fodder. Fodder is not collected only for
home consumption but is also an important source of revenue for the villagers. Another important
source of revenue is the leaves of anjan, which, being a high-value fodder, fetches a good price. A
few villagers collect medicinal plants from the forest. Cattle graze in the forest.

Towards community conservation

According to the villagers, excessive grazing by the cattle of the nomadic Kathiawadi community
from the neighbouring state of Gujarat was a major reason for forest degradation in Buldhana
district. Traditionally, Kathiawadis would migrate seasonally to Buldhana district to graze their
cattle and sheep. They had a distinct understanding and resource-sharing arrangement with the
local villagers. Local villagers would offer to house them on their land to get manure in their fields
from the goats. However, this relationship started changing over last two decades. Gradually,
the Kathiawadis bought land and settled in parts of Buldhana. They owned cattle and donkeys in
hundreds, which would graze in the surrounding forests, leading to rapid degradation of forests.
The donkeys would feed on the bark of the teak tree, resulting in the wilting of the trees. To
camp in the forest, the Kathiawadis would clear patches of forest. While in the past they used
the forests for a short period in a year, moving on to other areas soon, now they remained in the
forests almost throughout the year. The local people could not stop them since the Kathiawadis are
financially and politically a very strong community.
Illegal tree-felling for the saw-mills was another major problem. This was done by an organised
forest mafia using a group of 20 to 30 women and men. Many times male forest staff found
themselves helpless in controlling these smugglers for fear of being framed for mistreating
women. The leaders of this mafia were also known to bribe the FD and had connections with the
politicians.
case studies - maharashtra

The local people wanted to put a stop to all these activities that were causing degradation of
their forest. However, they felt helpless due to the strong economic and political power that the
Kathiawadis and the mafia enjoyed. Villagers saw a ray of hope when the new DFO (Territorial) of
Buldhana, Dr. Mohan Jha,1 showed interest and determination to stop these illegal activities.
In 1996, annoyed by the situation, the villagers of Dongarkheda—a village close to Botha—
approached Dr. Jha and sought his help. That same evening, Jha conducted a meeting in
Dongarkheda and towards the end of the meeting a plan of action was prepared to drive away
the Kathiawadis. The very next day, villagers of Botha (including women), Dongarkheda and a
few other villages gheraod (encircled) the heti (settlement of Kathiawadis). They stayed there for
two days and refused to let the Kathiawadi cattle graze in the forest. The forest staff helped and
carried food and other requirements for the villagers. The Kathiawadis finally surrendered. They
were asked to pay Rs 50,000 as a fine for grazing in the forest and leave Buldhana district. The
367
368 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Kathiawadis agreed, paid the fine, left the district and have not returned till date. The recovered
amount was deposited in the forest department treasury.

Beginning of Joint Forest Management (JFM)

Encouraged by this experience, the villagers of Botha decided to protect the forest in their area.
They were also convinced of the commitment of Dr. Jha to the cause of forest protection.
The Joint Forest Management programme of the Maharastra Forest Department was taking
shape during this period. On seeing the willingness of the villagers to protect their forest, Dr. Jha
visited Botha and informed the villagers of this programme. The villagers felt that the programme
would help them to protect the forest. The gram sabha (village council) and the gram panchayat
(village executive) passed a resolution to participate in the JFM programme and a forest protection
committee (FPC) was constituted in August 1996. As per the JFM Resolution, the local forester
became the member-secretary of the committee and one individual from each household became
a member of the FPC. With the active participation of the villagers, a micro-plan was prepared
by the FD. A participatory rural appraisal was conducted to know more about the village and to
understand the needs of the people.

The DFO Buldhana signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the FPC and allocated
1486 ha of forest land to it for protection. The responsibilities of the FPC included:
1. Protection of forests,
2. Regulated use of forest products that were obtained from forest cleaning, etc.,
3. Maintenance duties,
4. Ensuring equitable sharing of any benefits to the entire village from the forest produce, and
5. Protection against fire.
In the first year of JFM (1997), a community hall was built and a leaf plate-making machine was
purchased. However this machine did not prove to be useful, as there was no assured market
in the vicinity. A check-dam was also constructed to increase the availability of water in the
village and bamboo plantation was carried out on 20 ha. In the next year, mixed plantation was
undertaken on 25 ha.
A separate bank account for the FPC was opened, which was jointly operated by the secretary
and the president of FPC. Fodder grown on the protected forest land was harvested and distributed
in the village by this body. Surplus was sold in the market and the money was deposited in the
FPC account.

Protection of the forest land

Villagers took turns in forest protection. They did not appoint any paid watchman.
Cattle, sheep and goats were not allowed inside the protected area. For grazing a
fine of Rs 20 per cow and Rs 30 per bullock was charged. Sheep, if caught, were
handed over to the FD for legal action. In 1997-8 with the help of the FPC, the FD
registered 11 cases against illegal grazing and tree felling. Rs 45,470 was collected
as penalty which was deposited in the FD. Before the JFM programme there were
hundreds of goats in the village. After JFM the village decided to reduce the goat
and sheep population, and switched to rearing buffaloes and cows to reduce
pressure on the forest. To allow the plantations and fodder to grow, rotational
grazing of cattle was practiced with a cycle of 4 years.
The FPC had many sources of revenue apart from the fine amount and the
auction of the confiscated material. It also collected anjanpala, i.e., leaves of
anjan. These trees make very good fodder and are found in abundance in the
forest. These leaves were plucked under the supervision of the FPC, collected at
one place and sold at a reasonable price. The revenue earned from the sale was
used in paying off the wages of the labour engaged in plucking, and the surplus
was deposited in the FPC account. This JFM programme was supported by the
World Bank-funded Maharashtra Forestry Project. Under the project the FPC was
receiving Rs 1000 per month for protecting the plantation till the duration of the
project, which ended in the year 2003.
 Maharashtra 369

The FPC even managed to earn some income for the FD. For instance, during a collective
inspection tour with the forest guard, the FPC noticed 20 live stumps on the protected forest land.
Coppicing and cleaning of these stumps yielded 4.088 cubic meter of wood, which was auctioned
and the sum of Rs 20,000 was handed over to the FD.

Participation in range, district and state level networks

Buldhana division consists of seven ranges. There are range-level networks of all the FPCs in
that particular range. The district-level network of FPCs comprises members of range-level FPCs.
The network used to meet once in six months. The SDO (Sub District Officer) is the secretary
of the district-level network. The current status of the network is not known. Khamgaon range
network had 15 FPCs and 11 members on the executive committee (EC). The range-level network
is represented by one or two members of the individual FPCs. The network would choose its own
president and secretary and meetings of the network were held every three months. The tenure
of each elected EC would be for one year. Expenditures incurred for the meetings were paid by
contribution. The network guided the individual FPCs on issues related to registration, protection,
etc. If any of the FPCs faced any problem, the network approached the higher officials to resolve
them.
Botha FPC was also a member of JFM Maharashtra Network. FPC members felt that their
association with the state-level network definitely helped them in lobbying for their case.

Impacts of community conservation

Protection activities have led to protection of forests from large-scale illegal grazing, extensive
forest fires and illegal felling. The Botha FPC received the Vanashree award for the year 1997-8 for
their efforts at forest conservation.

Opportunities and constraints

Till the end of 1997, the FPC was very active in the protection of the allotted forest land. However,
serious problems developed thereafter. Two major problems were declaration of a wildlife sanctuary
in the area, and hence a sudden shift in rights and responsibilities without any consultation with
the villagers; and a World Bank-sponsored forestry project coming to an end in 2003.

Declaration of Dnyanganga sanctuary

The Dnyanganga Wildlife Sanctuary was declared in January 1998 in accordance with the state
government’s resolution to bring a certain percentage of forest land in every division under the
protected area network.
The sanctuary includes within its boundary forests protected under JFM by Botha and other
villages in Buldhana. The declaration of the sanctuary also meant transfer of jurisdiction from
the territorial wing of the FD to the wildlife wing. Thus completely new staff with a very different
mandate (of strict protection of the area from all kind of human use) were now in charge of the
area. Within the sanctuary, rights of the local people were no longer valid. The villagers could not
enter the sanctuary without the permission of the District Forest Officer (Wildlife) at Akola. The
FPC established under JFM was now considered defunct, as the Wildlife Protection Act did not allow
case studies - maharashtra

for any conservation model that involved local people in the management, or any kind of use of a
PA. This gave rise to a conflict situation. People felt betrayed; according to them, ‘The wildlife for
which the sanctuary was declared has been benefiting as a result of the protection provided by the
FPC, so the villagers should not be denied their rights.’
After many deliberations with the Wildlife Wing, including the Conservator of Forests, Wildlife,
the villagers decided to continue with the protection of the allotted land and sale of the surplus
fodder in the market. The Villagers were supported by Maharashtra Joint Forest Management
Network and other NGOs in their demand. Though the FD has not accepted this legally, informally
villagers have been give verbal assurances that they could continue fodder extraction as long as
this is not misused for commercial interests.
370 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Protection without ‘protection’ - attack on the FPC members

On 10 August 1998, a few FPC members accompanied the RFO, Forester and Forest Guard were
on patrolling tour when they found about 1000 sheep grazing illegally on the 25 ha of protected
plantation. On the instructions of the forest staff, the villagers started rounding off the sheep and
caught one of the Dhangars (mobile goat and sheep rearers, migrating locally within Maharashtra).
Suddenly they were attacked by a hidden group of about 30 to 35 Dhangars. The forest staff were
not attacked but they remained silent spectators. Four villagers were seriously injured and were
admitted to a hospital. Though the hospital expenses were borne by the FD, it did not file any
complaint against the Dhangars. The Dhangars, on the other hand, launched a false complaint
against the FPC members for violent attacks at a place which was 7 km away from the actual site
where the confrontation took place. Their complaint included the names of Botha villagers who
were not even present at the site when the confrontation took place. The villagers suspect that
the Dhangars were instigated to resort to violence by the local politicians. This was apparently
because the Dhangars were actually looking after a huge population of sheep owned by the local
politicians.
Villagers of Botha whose names were in the complaint were arrested and later released on bail.
However, for the next three years the case was pending in the court. The cost of the case was
borne by the FPC, which they managed to meet with great difficulty.
Some NGOs, such as Kalpavriksh, Vrikshmitra and JFM Maharashtra Network, investigated the
case and submitted a detailed report to the government. They lobbied for taking the case off the
board; finally, the case was resolved in 2002.
This attack and the following events affected the morale of the nearby FPCs. They felt that it
was futile risking their lives for protection of the forests when the FD itself does not show the
commitment to assist them. However the Botha FPC has made an attempt to convince them to
continue with the protection of forests saying that if a similar incident happens again they will now
be better prepared with the bad experience behind them.

Village eco-development programme

After constant demands from the villagers and continuously extending protection to the forests,
in 2003 the DCF (Wildlife) formed a Joint Wildlife Protection Committee on a strictly informal
experimental basis. Under the Village Eco-development Programme, a number of activities were
undertaken, aimed at reducing dependence on the forest and hence the pressure on it.
Approximately Rs 600, 000 were sanctioned for this village in the early 2000s. With these funds,
training programmes for skills such as motor rewinding, motor driving, bee keeping, poultry rearing
and masonry work were organised, wherein resource persons from outside were specially invited
to train the villagers. Horticultural trees were also planted. Out of the Rs 600,000, approximately
Rs 300,000 were utilized for the above-mentioned activities; the remaining Rs 300,000 were
sanctioned for improving irrigation. However an irrigation check-dam had already been constructed
by the zilla parishad (district council). Since the villagers were not allowed to divert it for any other
activity, this money was returned to the government.

Crop damage by wild animals

Crop damage by wildlife is a major problem near the sanctuary area. Compensation is seldom
paid in these cases. It is quite difficult to prove the cause of damage. To reduce the damage, the
wildlife wing planned to install a solar energy-activated fence around the sanctuary area. The
amount was sanctioned for 4 km, but the villagers wanted it for 10 km. They decided to ask for
more funds and returned the already sanctioned amount. The funds have not arrived yet. The
FPC feels that they have learnt a lesson: ‘Never to return government grants in anticipation of
additional amount.’

Conclusion
Botha is considered a success story of JFM in Maharashtra. DCF (Territorial) Mohan Jha who
initiated the JFM programme in Buldhana had a cordial relationship with the local villages and
was able to use this relationship to effectively protect the forests as well as improve the economic
status of the villagers. However, under political pressure he was transferred from Buldhana. The
 Maharashtra 371

Wild Life (Protection) Act was implemented in the area for the well being of the forests and wildlife;
however, while implementing the law the ground reality was completely ignored. The wildlife wing
would have done well by building on the existing goodwill of the people. The law needs to be more
flexible to be able to incorporate the preparedness and contexts of a local situation.
Presently the FPC is functional. Protection activity is still going on. The villagers collect dry wood
and anjanpala from the sanctuary area with the oral permission of the Conservator of Forests
(Wildlife).
The villagers strongly feel that the FPC should have legal recognition, and should be given
identity cards. Considering that they shoulder most of the protection responsibility, they should be
given the status of forest staff. The FD officials are sceptical and think that the FPC may misuse
such powers.
The FPC members have decided to participate in party politics as they feel that political support
is essential in case of difficulty. There have been attempts to bribe the FPC members into letting
the Dhangars graze on the forest land. However till now, the members have shown commitment
and not succumbed to such temptations.
The FPC is trying to take back from the wildlife wing the 1468 ha of forestland that was protected
under the JFM programme. They have registered the FPC and the Wildlife Protection Committee in
May 2001 under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, and Societies registration Act, 1860. They feel
that registration will enable them to undertake activities and accept grants directly.
Some of the forest officers feel that the Botha success has been blown out of proportion in order
to gain publicity and the ground reality is quite different. The officers also feel that JFM programme
cannot be implemented successfully if funds are not available. However the Botha FPC members
say that they are willing to protect their forest even if there is no financial provision.

This case study has been compiled based on field visit report of Girija Godbole (Jeevan Sanstha,
Pune) in 2001; and the visit of Neema Pathak and Neeraj Vagholikar (Kalpavriksh) in 1999.

For more information contact:

Bhagwan
Village Botha
Buldhana District, Maharashtra

Neema Pathak
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa
908 Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411004
Maharashtra
E-mail: neema.pb@gmail.com

Endnotes
1
Later he was awarded the Indira Priyadarshini award for his efforts.
case studies - maharashtra
 CCA/Mah/CS1/Ahmednagar/Hiware Bazar/Natural resource conservation

Hiware Bazar, Ahmednagar

Background
In the fast-developing urban growth of India,
there are a few small villages that can teach us a lot
about progress that is ecologically balanced! Hiware
Bazar would certainly lead the list of these villages.
About 17 km away from the city of Ahmednagar in
the state of Maharashtra, this community of 1250
people has taken the reins of its future firmly in its
own hands! A village that was considered to be a
‘punishment zone’ by all government officials who
were posted there due to its high crime rate has in
the last 17 years turned around completely. Hit by
repeated droughts, migration of its inhabitants to
larger cities and a severe addiction to liquor, this
village hit rock bottom in the late 1980s. Hiware Bazar Photo: Manisha Gutman
The village hosts a typical grassland ecosystem with thorny acacia species and neem trees. The
village is surrounded by small hills, on which many continuous contour trench (CCT) and nala
bundings were made. Among the big mammals found here are the blackbuck and the black-naped
hare.
The village conserves about 976.84 ha of forest, which is legally a reserved forest, under the
jurisdiction of the forest department. In addition, the village has privately owned land and village
common land.
The main communities residing here are the Hindu marathas and scheduled castes like mahar,
mang, ramoshi, cobbler and carpenter. Milk production, poultry and farming are three main sources
of income. The total livestock of the village is approximately 2000. Many people from this village
are in the armed forces or teachers. The village is dependent on the surrounding forest for its
fuelwood and fodder requirements.
Historically, this village was an important and prosperous trading center because of its location.
Hiware Bazaar marked the end of Shivaji’s territory and the beginning of the Nizam’s area. The
prosperity was apparent in the plentitude of food and water for the people and animals of the village.
Hiware Bazaar’s downfall began in the early 1970s. A drought-prone area, the farmers had no option
but to be dependent on rains for a single crop every year. The decline in the availability of water
for drinking and agriculture led to increased unemployment of the farmers. This was immediately
reflected in the increased rate of alcoholism, crime and migration to the cities. The social structure
was so badly affected that the eligible youth would not get brides from outside the village. This was
for two reasons: first, that the woman would have a hard life due to paucity of water and, second, it
was feared that alcoholism and crime rampant in the village would affect the future of the family.
case studies - maharashtra

Towards community conservation

This situation continued till 1991. The transformation came about when Popatrao Pawar was
elected as the village Sarpanch. Holder of a Master’s Degree in Commerce and a former competitive
sportsperson, he began studying and implementing various government schemes for village self-
development. Under his guidance the villagers decided to proactively reorganize themselves. The
Yeshwant Krishi Gram Panlot Sanstha was formed and began chalking out a plan that would increase
the water table in the village. The forest around the village was divided into four watershed zones.
The villagers decided to construct various types of bunds and trenches, along with planting trees
and constructing storage and percolation tanks. A number of check-dams were built in order to
prevent loss of water by run-off.
Various government schemes and voluntary agencies supported this integrated approach under
their own watershed development programmes. In 1993-4, an afforestation programme was
started with the help of forest department on 400 ha of land, which involved contouring of the hills
363
364 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

to reduce loss of topsoil and better water retention. Afforestation was also taken up on private
lands. Nearly 10.5 lakh trees have been planted in the past decades.
The villagers set up following rules and regulations for themselves and for the management of
the area:
• Certain areas were demarcated as no-grazing areas and grazing was permitted only in certain
patches.
• Tree felling was completely stopped.
• It was realized that borewells lead to rapid depletion of groundwater and unequal distribution of
water. This led to a decision prohibiting digging bore wells for the purpose of irrigation.
• Water-intensive crops such as sugarcane and banana were also prohibited, unless irrigated by
drip or sprinkler system.
• Selling of land to outside landlords or to industrialists was banned.
• The gram sabha also decided to ban hunting in the forest.
The village adopted the Adarsh Gaon Yojana (AGY) (Ideal Village Scheme).
Under the AGY the village under the leadership of Popatrao Pawar focused on restoring the natural
environment around the village, mainly by addressing the problem of soil and water conservation.
Due to heavy deforestation, the meagre rainfall received by the area was all lost in surface run-off.
The first steps were to help this water percolate into the earth, so that wells could be recharged
and vegetation could grow again.
Most of this was made possible because of the discipline that the villages agreed to impose upon
themselves and adhere to. In addition to the rules mentioned above, the village decided to follow
five thumb rules to ensure overall development:
1. No intake of liquor and other addictive substances (nasha bandi)
2. No free grazing in forest lands (charai bandi)
3. No tree felling (kulhad bandi)
4. No large families, i.e., the need for family planning (nas bandi)
5. Providing voluntary labour for community welfare (shramadaan). (Nearly a third of the work
that has gone into rebuilding the village has been done through voluntary labour offered by
the villagers!)
Since free grazing is not allowed and forests and grasslands are protected, people meet their
fodder requirements mostly from their agricultural fields. Since 1994, villagers have been stall-
feeding their cattle. Dairy is now a big business in the village, which is supported by fodder from
the grasslands extracted in a regulated manner prescribed by the villagers. After all the water
harvesting efforts, water is now in plenty; however even now it is used judiciously and equitably.
Water-intensive crops are not allowed and borewells are not dug in the village.

Institutional arrangements
Most major decisions are taken in the gram sabha (village council), which is convened on the 15
August (Indian Independence day) and 26 January (Indian Republic Day) every year. The gram
sabha meetings may be called at any time if there are any issues to be discussed or resolved. All
women and men aged 18 years and above are members of the gram sabha. 66 per cent of the total
electoral population forms the quorum. As a rule, at least one family member from each family
volunteers two days in a month for common village activities. The village nominates one full-time
volunteer who has passed at least his 10th standard and is aged between 25 to 35 years. As part of
the AGY, villagers also select a village committee to work for village development, which has to be
approved by the district commissioner. The committee also has to be approved by the gram sabha.
 Maharashtra 365

The committee is constituted of at least 7 members, of whom at least one has to be a woman and
one from a scheduled caste or tribe.

Impacts of community effort

As the water table got recharged, water reappeared in open wells and seasonal ponds. The constant
assured water has helped farmers to change their cropping patterns to grow crops that are more
nutritious and lucrative. Not only do the villagers now grow enough to last them the entire year
but are also able to generate substantial income by selling farm produce, particularly vegetables.
They have also managed to increase their profit margins by establishing direct producer-consumer
links and doing away with the middlemen. Now the produce from Hiware Bazar sells at good price
in the local market, as the village assures quality to the consumers. Additionally, the farming is
largely organic, since the villagers find it cheaper and more productive to use cowdung (which is
now available in plenty because of stall-feeding) and locally produced vermicompost.
The increased fodder available has improved the yield of milk from livestock. Milk production has
reached 2200 litres per day, as compared to a mere 150 litres per day in the mid-90s.Fodder in
the forest now is enough to meet all the village needs and those of the surrounding villages. Once
the cutting season is declared, anyone can take one headload per day till fodder remains available
on payment of Rs 100 for the entire season. Payment is made to the gram sabha.
Given the enthusiasm of the villagers, their efforts at forest conservation, watershed development
and the ban on hunting, the forest department has initiated its Joint Forest Management scheme
and the forests of the village have been handed over to the village for management. This has also
helped them bring in some resources for water harvesting structures and tree plantation.
The development indicators of the village are amazing. The number of wells have increased from
97 in 1999 to 217 in 2006. 600 ha of land has been brought under irrigation as against 120 ha in
1999. The number of families living below the poverty line has reduced from 198 in 1999 to 53 in
2006.
The village has paid serious attention to formal and informal education of the youth. In addition
to achieving 99 per cent literacy rate (as against 30 per cent in 1999), they also organize debates,
education camps, essay writing competitions, etc. for the village youth.
There has been a considerable decline in alcoholism and the crime rate. Out-migration has
declined sharply due to the cultivation of more than one crop per year. The spirit of cooperation
and success of the programme has increased the self-confidence of the villagers. Bio-gas plants
have been established for the purpose of meeting fuelwood requirements. Villagers claim that the
number of wild animals has increased since the ban on hunting.
As a recognition of their efforts, Hiware Bazaar received the Gram Abhyan Puraskar 1995-6,
the Adarsh Gaon Award in 1997, the National Productivity Award in 1998-9 and the Maharastra
Vanashree Puraskar in early 2000.
An effort to involve the neighboring villages of Akolner, Bhorvadi, Chaas, Kamargaon, Bhoirepathar,
Neemgaonwagha, Jakhangaon, Neemgaondhana and Dahitne in the conservation and watershed
initiative has now been initiated by Popatrao Pawar. This includes lectures and discussions with
the villagers.
In a report on Hiware Bazar, the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) website in September
2006 claimed that the protection measures have led to significant increase in the population of wild
animals in the village.
case studies - maharashtra

Conclusion
Having achieved what hundreds of villages in India
are striving for and urban areas should be striving for,
villagers in Hiware Bazar speak of their achievements
with pride, and rightly so! The village has very effectively
fought the pressure from land-grabbers, which is a big
pressure as the village is very close to the urban centres
of Ahmednagar, Mumbai and Pune. One of the rules
specifies that outsiders cannot buy land in Hiware Bazar,
and those villagers returning from big cities (and there are
several) have to stay in the village for a minimum of one
366 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

year to prove their commitment to village life before they can be re-accepted!
Finally, one realizes, the secret of the success of this village lies in the respect and space given to
each resident’s opinion. All decisions are taken through a process of consultation, ensuring inputs
from the collective wisdom of the community. Self- discipline is sustaining life in Hiware Bazar—the
lives of the environment as well as humanity!

The information here has been complied from an article by Girish Kulkarni, ‘Watershed
development transforms village in Ahmednagar district’; a questionnaire filled with the help of
villagers by Shanta Bhushan, Kalpavriksh, Pune, in 2000; a questionnaire answered by Mohan
Chattar Yashwant Krishi Gram aur Panlot Vikas Sanstha, (YKGPVS) on 20 April 2001; notes by
Manisha Gutman, Kalpavriksh, based on a field visit in September 2006.

For more information contact

Mohan Chattar,
Yashwant Krishi Gram and Panlot Vikas Sanstha, (YKGPVS)
Hiware Bazar,
Block No. 8,
Bhaji Market Building,
Market Yard,
Ahmednagar
Tel: 0241-355782
 CCA/Mah/CS9/Gadchiroli/Mendha-Lekha/Forest protection and self-rule

Mendha-Lekha village, Gadchiroli

Background
Gadchiroli district of Maharashtra state in India, along with areas in the surrounding districts
and states, is a region famous both for its biodiverse, dry deciduous forests as well as for its tribal
communities. The district is more than 700,000 hectares in area. Approximately 80 per cent is
under forest cover, a figure that is the highest in the state and is among the highest in India.
Mendha-Lekha is located 30 km from the district headquarters and is spread over two small and
closely situated tolas (hamlets). The total area of the village is estimated at 1900 hectares. Nearly
80 per cent of this area is forested. There are approximately 400 people in the village, largely
without any class and caste hierarchies. The entire population is composed of the Gond tribe,
which has ruled and inhabited the surrounding forests since time immemorial. The livelihood of the
villagers is heavily dependent on subsistence farming and on the forests, which provide a range of
food, fuel, timber and fodder. The average landholding is five acres. The major source of income
is from the collection of non-timber forest produce (NTFP) and daily wages from labour work with
government and private agencies.
According to Rodgers and Panwar (1968),1 the area falls in the bio-geographic zone of Central
Plateau. The forest type is the sub-group Southern Tropical Dry Deciduous Forests (5A/C3) of Dry
Deciduous Forests, with patches dominated by teak and bamboo. The local sub-types of forests
found here include teak forests with dense bamboo, teak forests with scanty or no bamboo, mixed
forests with dense bamboo, and mixed forests with scanty or no bamboo. The main species of
bamboo is veddur while katranji is also found along the major streams and riverbanks.
A total of 125 species of plants, 25 of mammals,
82 of birds, and 20 of reptiles have been recorded
from the forests so far. Villagers report presence
of Indian gaur, chital or spotted deer and wild
dogs or dhole in the past, none of which have
been sighted for last three decades. Animals
like monkey and Hanuman langur are used in
traditional medicines. Indian wolf, leopard, sloth
bear, tiger and Indian peafowl are the endangered
wild animal species in the forests of Gadchiroli
district at large. Another highly endangered
species found in these forests is the Central Indian
giant squirrel. The range of the sub-species found
here is restricted only to certain parts of central
India. Leopards are common, while tiger sightings A view of Mendha forest from the highest point
Photo: Vivek Gour Broome
are few and far between.

Towards community conservation

In the late 1970s the Indian government proposed an ambitious hydroelectric project in the
case studies - maharashtra

adjoining state of Madhya Pradesh. For the poor tribals of the region, the project not only meant
displacement from their traditional homes and possible social disruption but also destruction of
large stretches of forests on which their livelihood and culture heavily depended. It was also
claimed that the majority of the benefits to be derived from the power generated would go to
industry and other elite sectors of society. This awareness led to a strong tribal opposition to the
project, and many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) helped the local people mobilize and
organize public rallies and agitations against the dams. In 1985, after prolonged and determined
tribal resistance, the government shelved the project.
The anti-dam struggle emphasized and strengthened the determination of the tribal people to take
decisions at local level for activities directly affecting their lives. It gave rise to a strong movement
towards self-rule in the region, based on the revival of tribal cultural identity and greater control
over land and resources. Mendha was one of the villages where this process gained momentum.
392
 Maharashtra 393

Upon their return to Mendha, individuals

who had been engaged in the anti-dam
movement continued to advocate for
greater village self-rule and collective
responsibility. Discussions ensued
over a period of 4-5 years centred on
key village issues such as creating
equal status for women, reducing
alcoholism, creating greater personal
responsibility, and establishing means
to protect and regulate the use of the
surrounding forests. The discussions
led to many positive social, cultural and
environmental changes, including the
development of a forest protection and
management system in the village.
Prior to 1950 the forests in the
region were controlled and managed
Old burial site inside community protected forest, Mendha by local tribals as common property,
Lekha Photo: Ashish Kothari and their overall charge rested with the
tribal landlords. A strong system of community management governing the use of the common
lands existed. However, it is not clear what the health of these forests or the status of forest
management in the area surrounding the village of Mendha was. In 1950, following independence,
the Indian government abolished the tribal system and all lands were vested with the government
and subject to the Indian Forest Act (IFA) of 1927. Forest areas occupied by settlements continued
to be privately owned, whereas all other wasteland, common property land, etc. came under
state ownership. The forest department assumed management responsibilities for the forested
land. The customary rights over common property that people had enjoyed for generations were
not accepted, and the region was declared protected forests (PF).2 Under pressure from the local
population, an inquiry into local people’s rights was undertaken in 1953 and completed two years
later. The report recommended that the customary rights be legalized in the form of an act. There
was also a recommendation to form customary zones for villages to meet their daily requirements,
which was subsequently accepted and implemented.
However, because of the inaccessibility of the forests in the district, officials did not visit many
villages. Many questions and criticism were raised about how the customary zones were assessed
and demarcated. Demarcation was not made physically on the ground, and villagers were not
informed about the zones. Management and use of the government forests was then established
with detailed instructions and rules. These instructions envisaged that the forests would be managed
on a scientific basis by the forest department, and communicated to village governing bodies that
would then regulate the supply of customary requirements—using a quota system—as per the
established rules. However, the forest department was critical of many aspects of this programme
which granted large areas of forests for customary needs. In the 1960s, the forestry department,
looking to regain control of more forest land, took control of the quota system. As quotas were
not sufficient to meet people’s basic needs, and paying more money for further concessions was
not feasible, paying bribes to the local forest officers became a common practice. Mendha villagers
describe the period between the state takeover in the 1950s and the beginning of the movement
towards self-rule in 1989 as filled with unpleasantness and humiliation.
The state also exerted greater control over the forests in 1959, declaring its intention to constitute
some of the PFs as reserved forests (RFs). In accordance with the IFA, a study was carried out on
case studies - maharashtra

the rights of the local people in the forest (the IFA states that the rights of the local people must
either be legally accepted or acquired before any forests are converted to RFs). In 1992, based on
the study’s recommendations, 84 per cent of the total PFs and unmanaged forests in the Gadchiroli
Forest Division were declared RFs (1697.27 sq km out of a total of 2019.65 sq km). The remaining
16 per cent was assigned as PFs to meet people’s customary requirements. This decision affected
a substantial part of the forests traditionally falling within the boundaries of Mendha village. It
also meant that approximately 1900 hectares of the customary zone of the village was to be
reserved forests. This left only about 350 hectares as protected forests for the villages to meet
their customary needs. The criteria used by the forest department for determining and assigning
areas that would fulfil people’s customary needs were not clear. Despite local resistance, the
process was carried out.
Between 1950 and the late 1980s a number of state-sponsored commercial extraction activities
were initiated in the forests surrounding Mendha village. These activities, such as the indiscriminate
394 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

felling by charcoal contractors, forest department timber and bamboo extraction, and activities of
a paper mill (private bamboo extraction), along with the increased human and cattle population
within the village and in the surrounding areas, had a negative impact on the quality of the
forest.
Regarding forest-based wild animals, little is known about regulations or legal provisions protecting
them from hunting or trapping prior to 1972. After the enactment of the Wild Life (Protection) Act,
1972, hunting of wild animals was officially banned across India.

Village institutions managing forest-related issues

In Mendha, the movement towards self-rule and protection of the surrounding forests in the late
1980s led to the creation of three key village institutions.
The gram sabha (GS)
The village council for Mendha is called the gram sabha (GS). In the past, village elders took
most decisions. However, through the village discussions that took place during the late 1980s
movement towards self-rule, a decision was reached to constitute a village-level decision-making
body. The GS was created, and is responsible for all village-level decisions including those related
to natural resource use and management. It was agreed that the GS would use a consensus
process for decision-making, and that these decisions would prevail over any government or other
decisions. The GS initiated the move towards self-rule by acquiring factual, legal and political
information about the village including various revenue and customary use documents. The move
initially faced strong opposition from officials but villagers eventually succeeded in acquiring every
important document.
The GS is composed of at least two adult members (one male and one female) from each Mendha
household. All adult members of the village can attend the meetings. The GS has its own office
and an office administrator maintains the records of all meetings organized in the village. It meets
once a month and issues are discussed and revisited, if necessary until a consensus is reached.3
On average, about 75 per cent of the members attend GS meetings, with equal participation from
men and women. In 1999, a decision was taken to declare a traditional holiday on days when the
GS is convening to make it possible for the maximum number of people to participate. Outsiders
(including government, industry, NGO representatives, etc.) are occasionally invited to discuss
their plans and programmes with the villagers. The GS also functions as a dispute resolution body
for small village-level disputes. For larger conflicts, a meeting of elders from 32 surrounding tribal
villages is called. The GS also decides what activities will be assigned to other village institutions
based on interests, responsibilities and capacities.
The GS is responsible for the following forest-related decisions and activities:

• Carrying out watershed development in the forest

• Holding discussions on forest use activities and other issues such as forest fires and soil erosion
from the forests

• Formulating forest protection rules and ensuring adherence to these rules

• Selecting representatives for the official van suraksha samiti (see the Joint Forest Management
programme below)

• Delegating responsibilities for forest protection

• Handling NTFP extraction and trade-related
issues
In carrying out these decisions and activities, the
GS works with forest department staff. Most often,
these will be the local forester and two guards who
are directly responsible for the forests falling within
Mendha village boundaries. The GS can also interact
with the four forestry officers who oversee these
three functionaries.
The GS has also registered itself as an NGO, the
Village Management and Development Organization.
In this role, the GS carries out a number of village Gram sabha meeting, Mendha Lekha
Photo: Vivek Gour Broome
 Maharashtra 395

development and welfare activities. It focuses on equitably distributing the costs and benefits of
development projects and programmes amongst the villagers. The GS has also been a strong force
in coordinating the efforts of many government departments and NGOs wanting to offer various
forestry protection or development programmes.
So far, the GS has deliberately avoided receiving major external funds, unless originating from
government programmes targeted for the region. Each member of the GS donates 10 per cent
of her or his wages to the GS corpus fund from their employment generated through the GS.
Any money left over from GS projects or programmes also goes into the fund. In addition, any
donations or payments made by visitors go into the fund. The GS now has its own account in a
local bank, and uses a unique accounting system that spreads the responsibility and accountability
for withdrawing and spending money among many villagers.

The mahila mandal (MM)

All women in the village (of all ages and classes) are members. The President of the MM is chosen
at every meeting for that meeting. Often the GS meetings also work as MM meetings. Forest-
related activities carried out by the MM are:

• Regular monitoring of the forests;

• Punishing those who breach forest protection rules.

The abhyas gats (AG)

This is a study circle which operates as an informal gathering of people. Meetings are convened
as and when desired for discussions on any issue. Outsiders are sometimes specially invited if
the village wants some specific information or desires debate on a certain issue. These dialogues
have helped the villagers develop their conversation skills, increase their awareness of the outside
world, learn about their rights and responsibilities, and obtain important inputs and information
which help them take informed decisions at GS meetings. In turn, outsiders have gained insights
into village life and the process of village self-rule. For example, discussions initiated by outsiders
at the AG significantly helped the village overcome the problem of encroachments on forest land.
Discussions in the AG have also been focusing about the negative impacts of fire and hunting on
the ecosystem. Frequently, the AG members establish smaller, specialized study circles to pursue
particular issues and research (e.g., bird and habitat inventories, honey extraction). The following
are a few examples—and some results—of the many participatory research and monitoring activities
related to forest management:
• A study on the number and types of bird species and their habitats.
• A study on the impact of NTFP collection on the productivity of the concerned species. The results
led to a decision to prohibit the felling of fruit trees in the village.
• A study on the behaviour of bees and the structure of their combs during honey extraction. The
findings led to the development of a new enterprise specializing in ‘non-violent’ honey extraction.
The marketing of non-violent honey has generated substantial economic benefit for the members
of the honey-bee study circle.
Both village and outsider members of the study circles carry out these activities.
The gram sabha often interacts with another key
village-level administrative structure, the village
case studies - maharashtra

panchayat. The panchayat is an executive council

of elected representatives from one village or a
group of villages. It works with the government
administration and the judiciary. In most government
schemes and programmes the elected panchayat is
responsible for receiving funds and implementing
projects. The panchayat for Mendha is composed of
the elected members from Mendha and two other
adjoining villages. In 1999, a decision was taken by
these three villages to select rather than elect their
members to the panchayat. By doing so they hoped
to eliminate the corruption involved in the election
Villagers trying to identify birds found in their
forest Mendha Lekha Photo: Ashish Kothari procedure. The selection has to be unanimous and
the process takes place in an open meeting where
396 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

the merits of each candidate are discussed freely.

Establishment of forest protection activities

Efforts towards forest protection started in 1987 through various discussions in the gram sabha.
Several decisions were taken, including:
• All domestic requirements of the village would be met from the surrounding forests without
paying any fee to the government or bribes to the local staff.
• Approval of a set of rules for sustainable extraction.
• No outsider, including governmental, would be allowed to carry out any forest use activities
without the permission of the gram sabha. If someone was caught doing so, the material would
be seized by the village and the offender would have to accept any punishment decided by the
village.
• No commercial exploitation of the forests, except for NTFP, would be allowed.
• The villagers would regularly patrol the forest.
• The villagers would regulate the amount of resources they could extract and the times during
which they could extract resources from the forests.
To implement these and other minor decisions regulating extraction, an unofficial van suraksha
samiti (forest protection committee, see below) was formulated, including at least two members
from each household in the village. Originally, a procedure for collecting fines from those who did
not adhere to the village forest protection rules was established, but this failed to work because
people did not want the responsibility of collecting fines and, most often, fines were not paid.
As a result, the system for applying sanctions to Mendha village members became one of peer
pressure, creating family shame and social ostracism. In the commercial sector, the gram sabha—
representing a strong and united village opposition to forest practices and revenue sharing—
succeeded in stopping the timber industry’s bamboo and teak extraction from the late 1980s/early
90s.
Mendha villagers speak proudly of the fact that the forests now ‘belong’ to them, and that
they have implemented effective forest protection activities. Indeed, despite the state’s 1992
declaration of 1900 hectares of the customary zone of the village as Reserve Forests, the villagers
continue to view the entire area as their forest and include it in their activities governing regulated
use and protection.

Establishment of the Joint Forest Management programme

The efforts of the villagers at forest protection were not initially recognized in official circles.
However, in 1992 an opportunity arrived to remedy this when the state adopted a Joint Forest
Management (JFM) resolution. In general, the JFM scheme envisages the handing over of degraded
lands and forests to villagers for raising valuable timber species. Plantations are created and
valuable forests regenerated, with the forest department and villagers jointly responsible for
forest management. After 5–10 years, valuable timber is harvested and local villagers involved in
forest protection are entitled to receive up to 50 percent of the revenue generated. The scheme,
however, was not applicable for districts like Gadchiroli where most of the forests were still close
canopy natural forests. Since Mendha’s forests were healthy standing forests, the government did
not plan on creating plantations for revenue generation, and there were no guidelines for benefit
sharing for standing forests. The villagers, however, persistently demanded that they be included
in the JFM scheme, pointing out that they should not be punished for protecting their forests thus
far. With the help of some supportive forest officials, the villagers succeeded, and they entered into
a JFM agreement in 1992. Subsequently, an official van suraksha samiti (VSS)4 was formed and
Mendha became the first village with standing forests in the state—and one of the few in India—to
be brought under the JFM scheme.
After the introduction of the JFM programme, the villagers discussed the scheme in greater detail
with outside experts. Subsequently, the villagers managed to bring in many provisions that were
not usually within the mandate of the JFM resolution. These included meeting the actual needs of
the villagers and not interfering with the rules set out by the villagers for controlling the extraction
of resources from the forest. Thus, the rules (some written, but most unwritten) followed by the
villagers are a mixture of what the official resolution states and what the villagers have decided.
The written rules include:
 Maharashtra 397

• All decisions regarding the forests will be taken in a joint meeting between the forest department
and the villagers.
• Mendha villagers will have the first right to employment in any official forest-related activity in
the village.
• To carry out any work in the forests, permission will have to be sought from the gram sabha.

The unwritten rules include:

• Labourers from the outside will have to take a letter of permission from the VSS;
• Villagers will extract forest produce for their real requirement as per the existing village rules;
• Villagers will have the power to punish offenders both from within the village and outside;
• Details of the joint meetings will be recorded both by the forest department and the villagers.
The functions of the VSS were also adopted for Mendha’s JFM programme. The VSS in Mendha
meets far more often than it is officially obligated to, and the meetings are open to all members
of the GS, not just the executive committee. The creation of the official VSS has not affected the
functioning of the unofficial Mendha VSS, and official decisions found unacceptable to the villagers
are not carried out. The official VSS has a set of forest protection rules, and supports the authority
and role of the GS regarding its forest protection activities. The official VSS in Mendha carries out
the following forest-related activities:

• Daily forest vigilance, carried out equally by men and women members.
• Stopping outsiders from commercial extraction, e.g., the paper industry.
• Initiation and implementation of JFM in the village, including decisions about the time of bamboo
extraction and plantation, methods to be employed and payments to be made.

• Appointing an official firewatcher in the village.

For any forestry operation to be carried out under the JFM, a joint meeting between the forest
department and the villagers is organized and all matters, including those of daily wages, are
openly discussed. As evidenced above, the implementation of the JFM scheme is largely based on
the Mendha village rules and regulations, not the provisions of the JFM Resolution. JFM in Mendha
village is viewed as among the very few successful cases of JFM in Gadchiroli District.

Present forest-based employment and livelihood opportunities

After the village initiative towards forest protection started in the late 1980s, all outside
commercial activities in the forest were stopped. Beginning in 1994, the forest department designed
a Forest Working Micro-plan for Mendha village. Despite limited involvement of the villagers, the
gram sabha did discuss and accept joint bamboo extraction by the forest department and the
villagers. The micro-plan has been in operation since 1997-8, ending an almost decade-long ban
on commercial extraction from forests (except for NTFP). The following are the present-day forest-
based employment and livelihood opportunities for Mendha villagers:
• Food: There is substantial dependence on
the forest for food, including honey, roots, fruits,
mushrooms, bamboo shoots, fresh leaves, and
case studies - maharashtra

hunting for wild meat.

• Under the JFM agreement with the forest
department, the villagers have the first right to
any daily wage employment for forestry works in
the surrounding forests. These activities include
bamboo extraction and plantation of forest
species.
• Non-violent honey extraction and specialized
marketing.

Bamboo grove harvested under JFM, Mendha • Fuelwood: Permission from the VSS is required
Lekha Photo: Ashish Kothari for each cartload. As per the village rules collection
398 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

of only dry wood is allowed, with some exceptions for collecting green branches. Currently,
biogas plants are being constructed in the village to reduce the dependence on firewood.
• Timber and bamboo: For household needs, collected from the surrounding forests as usufruct
rights. Bamboo is a vital material in the villagers’ lives.
• Fodder for livestock: Each family owns about 5-6 heads of livestock on an average. Rearing of
livestock is for both consumption and sale. Cattle depend entirely on the forests for fodder. Cattle
dung, as manure for the fields, is an important added incentive to maintain livestock.
• NTFP: Collection for domestic consumption and for sale. Food and commodities are sourced from
various species’ flowers, fruits and leaves.

Impacts of community efforts

Ecological Impacts
Only limited ecological studies have taken place to try to measure the impact of Mendha’s
conservation initiative. A major finding is that, since the introduction of forest protection activities,
the unregulated use of forest resources by commercial interests, the adjoining villagers and
Mendha villagers has been controlled to a great extent. Mendha villagers claim that the quality of
the forests in general has improved during this period, but they qualify this, saying that availability
of certain resources, especially closer to the village, has gone down, including fuelwood and some
palatable grass species. They attribute this to the increased human and cattle population within the
village and in the adjoining areas. Due to increased human and cattle populations, encroachment
of forest areas for agricultural expansion has increased. Thus, the forests have receded further
away from the village leading to a decrease in forest resources in the vicinity. However, the
quality of the forests in Mendha improves as the distance from the village increases. Villages in
adjoining areas have the same, or worse, amount of degradation in nearby forests, and all have
greater degradation than Mendha in forests further away from the villages (possibly due to the
continuation of commercial extraction activities).
Specific, positive ecological impacts include:

• Soil and water conservation programmes: In the last seven years the villagers have taken up a
number of soil and water conservation programmes, including building an earthen dam to retain
water for longer periods. This has been especially critical in summers when water is a scarce
commodity;

• The decision not to set fires in the forests and to the extent possible help in fire extinction.
• A vigilant watch is now kept in the forests against illegal activities.
• The forests are protected from commercial activities like extraction of bamboo by the paper mill.
• Imparting to the government the value of bio-diverse forests. Through the JFM scheme, the
villagers have been able to impress upon the forest department their preference for a more
diverse forest in contrast to government-preferred forests dominated by commercially valuable
species.
A repeat visit to the forests in 2004 indicated that the quality of forests has gone down since the
extraction of bamboo started in 1998. Conversations with the villagers revealed that this has been
noted by them too, and there have been discussions in the gram sabha about what can be done
to check further degradation. Villagers are of the opinion that a three-year extraction cycle is too
short for optimal development of bamboo. This is also because, in addition to bamboo extracted
with the department, villagers too take bamboo boles and bamboo shoots. They were considering
bringing this up with the forest officials.
Along with a team of people under the guidance of Madhav Gadgil from the Indian Institute of
Science, the village youth have also compiled a People’s Biodiversity Register for the village. The
information has been uploaded on the village computer for the use of the villagers, if need be.

Social impacts
The following are some important social impacts of the village initiative towards self-rule and forest
protection:

• Increased empowerment by striving and achieving the capacity and confidence to assert their
rights and reaching a stage where the village is respected even in official circles. Today all
 Maharashtra 399

government and non-government people come to

the village (if they need to), instead of calling the
villagers to their offices. They sit with them and
converse with them on equal terms and often in
their language.

• Inclusion in decision-making processes.

• Established a reliable reputation as effective
partners in development and forest protection.
Through a non-violent strategy Mendha has
established strong and good relationships with
many government officials, who in turn have Villagers constructing biogas unit using pooled
helped them at many crucial points. resouces of the line agencies.
Photo: Vivek Gour-Broome
• Established informal yet strong institutional bodies.
The village has initiated a democratic and transparent process of informed decision-making and
implementation, which creates clarity in understanding and collaboration in community effort.

• Stronger equity: They have created almost equal participation of all villagers in the process of
decision-making, including women and the poor;

• Inspired others: The village effort has set an example for many surrounding villages, which have
a lower economic status. Many villages have begun to work towards the same model of fostering
self-reliance and a better quality of life.

• Managed financial transactions with confidence: The GS has its own bank account and manages
it well.

• Strengthened livelihood security to all: The GS tries to ensure basic economic security to all
villagers through access to forest resources or other employment opportunities, including forest-
based industry like honey and other NTFP collection.

• Strengthened inter-departmental coordination and cooperation among various government

agencies: Villagers have achieved inter-agency coordination and cooperation among all line
agencies functional in their area. For example, the gram sabha organized joint meetings of
representatives of all the government functionaries in the area with the villagers. These meetings
facilitated a face-to-face dialogue among these agencies and resulted in a pooling together of
otherwise segregated resources for certain developmental activities in the village.
While earlier there was a strong opposition to Mendha and its efforts at self-rule and forest
protection in surrounding areas, a visit in 2004 found the situation quite transformed. Adjoining
villages such as Lekha and Tukum are now trying to follow in the footsteps of Mendha. Despite a
multi-community society, Lekha village now meets regularly and discusses issues related to village
development as well as forest conservation.

Opportunities, constraints and steps for the future

While Mendha village has made significant progress with their process of self-rule and forest
protection, many challenges remain. The following are some of the main ones:

• Ecological monitoring and evaluation at the village level does not take place. There are no studies
being done to evaluate the impact of forest-use activities such as hunting and bamboo extraction
case studies - maharashtra

on the long-term viability and sustainability of the forest and its resources. The villagers, along
with a few researchers, are presently planning to establish a research station in the village. The
local villagers will assist the researchers both in fieldwork and data analysis;

• More efforts towards controlled hunting and grazing by cattle are needed, as is better personal
use of forest resources;

• Greater legal recognition of village process is needed. Even though Mendha villagers have de
facto control of the ecological and developmental processes in the village, aside from those
included in the JFM programme, these processes are not yet recognized by the law. There are
possibilities of giving legal recognition to the village efforts through many existing and proposed
laws and policies, which need to be explored. For example, in the case of long-term protection
of the forests, the villagers could consider requesting status as a protected area (i.e., national
park or sanctuary, under the Indian Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972). However, as yet there are
no provisions in the Act where the control of the protected area could remain with the conserving
400 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

communities and where they would be able to meet their subsistence needs while protecting
the area. Under the revised Wild Life (Protection) Act, 2003, two new categories—Community
Reserves and Conservation Reserves—have been introduced. However, both these would be
inappropriate for a situation like Mendha as of now. The Biological Diversity Act 2003, also has a
provision for the declaration of heritage sites, which could be useful for Mendha once the bill is
enacted. In the Forest Act of 1927, along with the RF and PF categories (both government-owned
and -managed) there is a third lesser-known and highly underutilized category of village forests
(VF). In this category, the forests are owned by the state but the management powers rest with
the surrounding local community. Mendha is an excellent candidate. The most important legal
provision for Mendha is the Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996. This Act gives
more decision-making and implementing powers to village-level institutions, especially in tribal
areas. It also confers ownership rights of a specified list of NTFP to the local communities. There
are many useful provisions in the Act which can be helpful to initiatives like Mendha’s. However,
the Act is relatively new and there has been little work toward implementation at the ground
level. Therefore, its potential remains unknown, and there are many outstanding issues. For
example, it is not yet clear whether the Act provides control over the resources and development
plans of government-owned lands (this would include the majority of Mendha’s forests) to the
local communities, or whether the GS (as in Mendha) is recognized as the basic administration
institution at the village level.

• Stronger institutionalization of the initiative is needed. In the absence of statutory recognition,

and subsequent institutionalization, the sustainability of Mendha’s initiative depends very heavily
upon various informal support structures. These are, for example, outside individuals, sympathetic
officers, and dedicated village members and leaders. Major changes in any of these people could
affect the character and progress of the initiative.

• An extension role should be considered. Considering that a large part of the villagers’ time
must go into earning their livelihoods, it is sometimes difficult for them to dedicate the time
and energy required for the forest protection activities, especially if there are no immediate
threats. Therefore, a proactive outside agency, especially a state agency, could play an important
extension role to keep the momentum going.

• Ongoing government resistance to power sharing continues. Despite the success of JFM, the JFM
resolution does not provide guidelines for benefit sharing in standing forests. Mendha villagers
demand that 50 per cent of the profits from the sale of any forest produce extracted from their
forests under the JFM scheme should be shared with the villagers, since they are sharing equal
responsibility with the forest department for forest protection. The forest department contends
that the area involved is too large and the revenue generated too much to share with a single
village. Mendha has put forth a number of possibilities to solve this issue, but so far the forest
department has resisted sharing revenues. Moreover, the forest department originally denied
the village had been officially accepted as a JFM village, an assertion quickly refuted based on
the village’s own copy of the minutes of the meeting establishing it as part of a JFM scheme.
Some of the problems stem from a distrustful attitude toward the Mendha initiative on the part
of forestry officials. This attitude comes from the bureaucracy’s continuation of the colonial
attitude of distrust and authoritarianism towards local communities. Education, including visits
by officials at all levels to Mendha can help create new beliefs and attitudes that support these
positive initiatives and social processes.

• Till the year 2000, efforts to include surrounding villages in village protection and regulated use
activities did not succeed. Even though neighbouring villagers were required to seek permission
for extraction of biomass for basic requirements from the VSS, they seldom abided by these
rules. To protect the forest resources from unauthorized extraction, material was confiscated.
Moreover, on-the-ground forest department staff are known to have accepted bribes from
members of surrounding villages in exchange for illegal extraction of resources. The situation has
changed in recent times after surrounding villages, on the persuasion of the forest department,
have decided to get into a Joint Forest Management arrangement.

• Village leaders and government officials need to make more efforts to engage villagers in the
development of a long-term forest management plan. Present forest staff, though helpful to
Mendha’s initiatives, are not proactive themselves. Suggestions have been made to the FD to
include villagers more in forest planning processes.

• Role of leadership and sustainability of effort: Transparent and democratic functioning of all
decision-making processes has achieved greater villager participation and investment, and thus
a more sustainable initiative. However, there is a lack of participation of youth in the process,
which could create a vacuum in terms of a second line of leadership. A greater focus on village
 Maharashtra 401

life and including local issues as an important part of the formal education syllabus may improve
the situation.

This case study has been adapted from: Neema Pathak and Vivek Gour-Broome, Tribal
Self-Rule and Natural Resource Management: Community Based Conservation at Mendha-
Lekha, Maharashtra, India (Pune, Kalpavriksh, and International Institute of Environment and
Development, London, 2001). The information taken from this book has been updated based
on a visit to the village in October 2004 by Neema Pathak, Ashish Kothari and Bansuri Taneja
of Kalpavriksh.

For more information contact:

Devaji Tofa
Village Mendha-Lekha
Dhanora Taluka
Gadchiroli District
Maharashtra
Ph: 07138-54129
Mob: 9421734018

Mohan Hirabai Hiralal

Chiddwar Hospital
Shinde plot, Ramnagar
Chandrapur,
Maharashtra
Ph: 07172-258134
Mob: 9422835234
Email: mohanhh@gmail.com

Neema Pathak and Vivek Gour Broome

Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa
908 Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411004
Maharashtra
Ph: 020-25654239
E-mail: neema.pb@gmail.com

Endnotes
1
H.G. Champion and S.K. Seth, A Revised Survey of the Forest Types of India (Dehradun, Forest Research Institute,
1968).
case studies - maharashtra

2
The IFA identifies three categories of forests under state control: protected forests (PF), reserved forests (RF) and
village forests (VF). The RFs are the strictest category where very few rights of the people are accepted and most
rights are extinguished. PFs allow more rights in them. VFs are forests which are owned by the state but are handed
over to the villagers for management and use, a category seldom used.
3
However, if there is unanimity, a decision will go forward without consensus. For example, despite divided opinion
on the value of controlled fires for maintaining forest health, the GS made a unanimous decision not to set forest
fires, which the villagers follow to the extent possible.
4
The van suraksha samiti (VSS) is the official forest protection committee established under the JFM resolution.
The VSS needs to include at least one member of each family in the village and is expected to elect an executive
committee composed of six village representatives, two NGO representatives, the head of the village executive, and
the local government-appointed village liaison person.
 CCA/Mah/Other villages

Other villages, Maharashtra

1. Bolunda village, Bhandara1
Bolunda village is located in Goregaon Taluka in Bhandara district of Maharashtra. The village
has traditionally protected a sacred grove, covering an area of 7 acres. This grove is located on
the boundary of Nagzira Wildlife Sanctuary. The natural canopy is dense, with 80 per cent of the
original vegetation in the sacred grove (SG) still intact with tall woody tree species. The flying
squirrel and rhesus macaque are some of the commonly found mammals here. The village has
a total population of 1,200 composed of Dhivar community, whose main occupation is fishing
(35 per cent), Koshti’s engaged in farm activities and agricultural labour (35 per cent) scheduled
castes mainly casual labours (25 per cent) and others (5 per cent). A few villagers depend on the
grove for extracting forest resources for basic needs. Most villagers have a strong faith in the deity
of the grove. Although there are no specific taboos associated with this deity, the villagers have
been protecting these forests for generations. It is believed that those who damage/exploit the
grove face natural calamities like rolling of rocks from the hill slopes and attacks by honeybees.
Hunting is not carried out in the sacred grove except when substantial crop damage is caused by
a particular animal. Local people are in a process of registering a trust for the maintenance and
management of the grove.

For more details contact:

Yogini Dolke
‘Shrujanpod’
At village: Mangurda
Post: Mangurda
Taluka Kelapur
District Yavatmal
Maharashtra 445302

2. Ravangaon and Shirsuphal villages, Pune

Ravangaon and Shirsuphal villages are located in the Daund and Baramati talukas respectively of
Pune district of Maharashtra. Located in the semi-arid parts of the Deccan plateau with grassland
vegetation type, the villages have protected the rhesus macaque for the last 400 years. Although
protection is only extended to the macaques, a number of other mammal species are found in the
area, such as the chinkara, the blackbuck and the Indian wolf. The villages are located in close
proximity to the Rehekuri sanctuary. The total population of the villages is about 15000 and that
of the livestock in the villages about 20000. The major source of income is agriculture, with crops
like sugarcane, onion and wheat grown on a large scale.

For more details contact:

case studies - maharashtra

Hammant Bidwe
Ph: 02117 – 37193
Praphul Bidwe
Ph: 02117 – 37186
Sopan Gadhave
Ratikant Dahale
At Post Ravangaon
Taluka Daund
Maharashtra
410
 Maharashtra 411

3. Siddheshwar village, Chandrapur2

Siddheshwar village is situated in the Rajura taluka of Chandrapur district, Maharashtra.
Siddheshwar can be reached by road and rail. The nearest railway station is at Virur, about 10 km
from the village.
The total population of the village is 300. The resident communities of the village are waddewars
(stone-breakers), golkars (shepherds), adivasi gonds (agricultural labourers) and other so-called
lower castes. They live in traditional mud houses built with grass and wood. The village has for
generations protected a sacred grove covering an area of 3.5 sq km and located at a distance of
1.5 km from the village. The sacred grove is owned by a trust called the Siddheshwar Shivalaya
Devasthan.
The villagers, young and old alike, are staunch believers in the deity (Lord Shiva) residing in
the grove. The villagers are partially dependent on the grove for meeting their subsistence needs,
although visually there does not appear to be any serious negative impact of this on the grove
ecosystem. In 1995 they registered the trust to promote plantation and other educational activities
in the area. They believe that the grove supports many medicinal plants and even the water from
the grove has disease-and pest-control properties. They are hoping for greater support from local
political parties and the administration for better management and protection of the grove.

For more details contact:

Yogini Dolke and Ajay Dolke

‘Shrujanpod’
At village: Mangurda
Post: Mangurda
Taluka: Kelapur
District: Yavatmal
Maharashtra 445302

4. Adiyal tekdi, Brahmapuri

Located in Chandrapur district of Maharashtra, Adiyal Tekdi is a small village covering 30 ha,
established in 1966 by Tukaram Dada Geetacharya on the suggestion of the spiritual guru Sant
Tukdoji Maharaj. The village is occupied by 60-70 families and has been established with the
objective of creating a self-sufficient and self-governed village.
In this village the villagers construct their own houses, grow food organically for their requirements,
produce their own oil, fruit and other articles of basic need. They also depend on locally found
medicinal plants and naturopathy for combating disease and ill-health. The village represents a
farm-forest ecosystem and supports many wild fauna and flora. Villagers carefully manage and
sustainably use their forests. These forests support a good population of wild cat, wild boar, jackal,
and others.
Adiyal Tekdi has been an inspiration for many neighbouring villages like Charoti, Lakhapur,
Metepar, Dhorpa, etc. to work towards village self-rule and forest protection and management.
case studies - maharashtra

For more details contact:

Rajani
Sant Tukdoji Maharaj Ashram
Adiyal Tekdi
Mul Taluka
Brahmapuri District
Maharashtra
Ph: 07174-221226
Manipur
Manipur - an introduction
Location and biogeography
Manipur covers an area of 22,327 sq km and lies between latitude 23° 80’ N to 25°68’ N and
longitude 93°03’ E to 94°78’ E bordering Myanmar to the east, Nagaland to the north, Assam to
the west and Mizoram to the south. The hill ranges occupy 90 per cent of the total geographical
area and completely surround the oval-shaped central valley, which has an area of 2,230 sq. km.
The altitude of the state above mean sea level varies from 790-2020 m.
The two major river systems in the state are the Barak drainage system (part of Bramhaputra
drainage) and the Chindwin system. Monsoon climate and rainfall spreads from April to October.
Mean maximum temperature varies from 24°C (January) to 33°C (May) and mean minimum
temperature from 2°C (January) to 20°C (August). Annual rainfall in the state is 76.9 cm. The
major mineral found in the state is limestone.
Physiographically, Manipur can be characterised as two distinct physical regions: an outlying
area of rugged hills and narrow valleys, and the inner area representing the features of flat plain
topography with all associated landforms.
The total forest cover is 17,219 sq km (as per the Forest Survey of India 2003), constituting
about 77.12 per cent of the total geographical area. The majority of the forest area is of the
category Unclassed Forest (76.6 per cent), with a small percentage of Protected Forest area (8.4
per cent). There are 14 major lakes (wetlands) in the state, forming a major part of the area
under wetlands.
Broadly, there are four types of forests: (i) Tropical Semi-evergreen (ii) Dry Temperate, (iii) Sub-
Tropical Pine, and (iv) Tropical Moist Deciduous.

Biodiversity
The flora of Manipur consists of 2192 plant species distributed over 213 families and 1012
genera. The state has 51 bamboo species identified within its geographical boundaries. There are
500 varieties of orchids, of which 472 have been identified. The important mammals of the state
are tiger, leopard, clouded leopard, spotted linsang, Asiatic black bear, Malayan sun bear, Indian
elephant, golden cat, marbled cat, Chinese pangolin, slow loris, various ungulates and primates.

Socio-economic profile
The population of the state, according to 2001 census data, is 21,66,788. The people of Manipur
are grouped into three main ethnic communities: the meiteis, those inhabiting the valley, and the
29 major tribes in the hills which are further divided into two main ethno-denominations, namely
nagas and kuki-chins. The meiteis are Hindus by faith while many tribal groups are Christians. In
addition to meiteis, the valley is also inhabited by Nepalis, Bengalis, Marwaris and people from
other Indian communities.
The meiteis, who live primarily in the state’s valley region, form one of the primary ethnic
groups. Their language, meitei (also known as Meiteilon or Manipuri), is also the lingua franca in
the state. Other languages spoken in the state are Nepali, Hindi and Bengali (2001 census data)
and various naga or kuki-chin languages. Scheduled castes constitute about 2.8 per cent of the
state chapter - manipur

total population while scheduled tribes make up 34.2 per cent.

The major occupation is farming along with other forest-based livelihoods. Agricultural
systems in Manipur are divided into 3 systems: i) Jhum or shifting cultivation on hill
slopes, ii) Permanent or settled agriculture in flat lands of the valley, and iii) Terraced
agriculture in the gentle slopes. Teak, pine, oak, uningthou, leihao, bamboo, cane,
etc. are important forest resources growing in plenty. In addition, rubber, tea,
coffee, orange, cardamom, etc. are also grown in hill areas. The forests offer
avenue of livelihood and employment to a large section of the hill population.
Sericulture and horticulture are being promoted in a big way by various government
departments in the state.

415
416 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Administrative and political profile

The princely state of Manipur was merged in the Indian Union on 15 October 1949 and became
a full-fledged state of India on 21 January 1972. Local institutions at the district, block and village
levels operate in the state as elsewhere in the country. There are nine districts, 30 tahsils, and
2182 villages and uninhabited 30 villages in the state.
As per constitutional provisions in Article 371–C, Autonomous District Council status has been
conferred on Hill Areas of Manipur. The council functions as per the Manipur (Hill Areas) District
Council Act. Manipur has been seeking Sixth Schedule status for all its hill areas for decades; these
areas account for about a third of the total population of the state.1

Conservation
There are two national parks (Keibul Lamjao and Siroy) and five wildlife sanctuaries (Bunning
WLS, Jiri-Makru, Kailam, Yangoupokpi-Lokchao and Zeilad). The forest department of the state
has also identified ex situ conservation sites for sangai deer, orchid preservation and zoological
gardens.
Loktak lake is the biggest natural wetland in the north-eastern region of
India with an expanse of 26,600 ha. Loktak lake is also included in the
list of World Heritage Sites out of five sites in India. Loktak lake and
Keibul Lamjao were declared as Ramsar Sites in 1990. However it was
added to the Montreux Record under the Ramsar Convention on 16 June
1993.2 Additionally Zeilad lake has been proposed to be included as one
of the Ramsar sites in the state by Bombay Natural History Society.3 There
are nine Important Bird Areas identified in the state by the Indian Bird
Conservation Network (IBCN).4
The various threats to the ecosystems of Manipur are habitat loss, jhum
cultivation, deforestation, hunting and hydroelectric projects. There are seven
major development projects taken up so far and two more are proposed.
In many traditional village communities like the Tangkhul Nagas, systems of land management
exist for optimum resource utilization. All lands belong to the village community and there are
separate zones for different kinds of cultivation, woodlands (as green belts), common village land
and homesteads.
There are numerous sacred groves with dense forest patches and even individual trees that are
preserved by people in the state due to their belief in nature worship. A number of groups like
Green Warriors are doing commendable services in increasing forest cover.

This information has been compiled by Saili S. Palande mostly based on Environment and
Ecology Wing (NBSAP, Manipur State Nodal Agency), Manipur State Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan (Department of Forests and Environment, Government of Manipur, 2003). Prepared
under National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Ministry of Environment and Forests
(Government of India). Other sources for specific information are given in the text.

Endnotes
1
Source: Advisory Panel on Decentralisation and Devolution, ‘Empowerment and strengthening of Panchayati Raj
Institutions’, A Consultation Paper on Empowering and strengthening of Panchayati Raj Institutions/Autonomous
District Councils/Traditional Tribal Governing Institutions in North-East India (National Commission to Review the
Working of the Constitution).
2
List of Ramsar sites in danger are put in this record and if relevant actions are not taken to remove the threats by
the concerned governments, the sites are taken off the Ramsar list after an evaluation.
3
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani. Potential Ramsar Sites in India (Mumbai, IBCN, BNHS and Birdlife International, UK,
2006).
4
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani. Important Bird Areas of India: Priorities of Conservation (Mumbai, IBCN, BNHS and
Bird Life International, 2004).
 CCA/Manipur/CS1/Bishnupur/Loktak/Wetland and species conservation

Loktak lake, Bishnupur

Background
Loktak lake is situated approximately 38
km south of Imphal (the capital of Manipur)
in the Bishnupur district of Manipur. It acts
as a natural reservoir for the rivers and
streams of the valley and hills in the state.
Loktak is the largest freshwater inland
natural reservoir in the eastern region of the
country and has been identified as a major
Indian wetland by the World Conservation
Union (IUCN). The rich wildlife/biodiversity
of this area had earned it the status of a
Ramsar site of international importance in
1990. Loktak Lake also finds a mention in
the Montreaux Record, which is a record of
Ramsar sites ‘where changes in ecological
character have occurred, are occurring or Loktak lake Photo: Ashish Kothari
are likely to occur’.
All villages in the lake periphery are connected by road to Imphal via Bishnupur Bazar and
Moirang on the western side of the lake, and via Mayang Imphal and Sekmaijin on the eastern side
of the lake. The rainfall varies between 600 mm and 1600 mm (with an average of 1400 mm).
The ecosystem can be described as a wetland with north-south elevation (Imphal 790 mamsl;
Loktak lake surface at present level 768.5 mamsl). About 36 feeder streams from the western
catchment area flow into Loktak. The lake is characterized by the presence of a thick floating
biomass locally called phumdi. A variety of plants and grass grow on the phumdi.
The lake is dotted with several small islands,the prominent ones being the Thanga and Karang
islands, both inhabited. The 28896 ha Loktak lake area is actually not a single body but a composite
of several separate wetlands, locally known as ‘pats’, which could earlier be easily distinguished
in the lean season before the Loktak Hydel Project (see section on socio-economic changes) was
initiated.
Besides the massive occurrence of phumdi, there is also a large growth of aquatic plants like
ishing charang, kabo-kang (water hyacinth) and kabo-napi. In addition, there is now an extensive
growth of choura, which is an introduced grass species originally brought in from outside the state
as fodder for cattle and now found colonizing the phumdi. Choura has practically dominated other
species occurring on the phumdi.
The open waterbody provides a habitat to migratory water birds in winter months, starting from
October up to March-April. An area of around 5200 ha in the southern part of Loktak lake, inclusive
of the Keibul Lamjao portion, was declared a wildlife sanctuary in 1954, but the area was later
reduced to around 4050 ha and was declared a national park, called Keibul Lamjao National Park
(KLNP), in 1977 under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, and the Manipur Wild Life (Protection)
Rules, 1974.
case studies - manipur

In addition, the state forest department (wildlife wing) has proposed the adjoining area of Pumlen
Pat (approx. 2200 ha, located on the south-eastern side of Loktak Lake and across the eastern
bank of Manipur River) as a bird sanctuary.
Vegetation growth like tou, singnang and singmut in the park area provide shelter to various
species of wildlife including the sangai or swamp deer, kharsa or hog deer, lamok (wild boar),
sanamba (common otter), moirang sathibi achouba (large Indian civet), moirang sathibi macha
(small Indian civet) and kak-thenggu (Malayan box turtle) among others.
There are approximately 55 suburban and rural settlements within and around Loktak Lake. The
predominant community is meitei (both Vaishnavite Hindus and orthodox meiteis) with a sparse
population of meitei Christians and meitei Pangal (Manipuri Muslims) living in separate pockets

417
418 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

around the lake. There is also a small population

of kabui (rongmei tribe) in Toubul village near
Bishnupur district headquarters on the western
side of the lake.
It is estimated that around 30,000 people
depend on fishing for their livelihood in the lake
area. The number of hutments constructed on
the phumdis is estimated to be more than 1000,
with a rough population of about 4000 individuals.
The total human population in Bishnupur district
according to the 1991 census is 1,80,773 with a
density of 364 persons per sq km.
Phumdi vegetation in Loktak lake in Manipur
Photo: Ashish Kothari The primary sources of income of the local
people have been traditional agriculture and
traditional fishery phum-namba. Income is also derived from sale of locally produced vegetables
such as cabbage, cauliflower, potato, brinjal, ladyfinger, parkia (tree bean), and dry and fermented
fish, fermented bamboo shoots, edible plants and roots from Loktak lake, water-reed mats, etc.
More recent forms of income are modern fishery practices, large-scale farming with modern
equipment and technology, small-scale businesses, transport businesses with cycle-rickshaws,
auto-rickshaws, jeep taxis, minibuses, shops, restaurants, and employment with the government
at different levels.
After the commissioning of the Ithai barrage on the Manipur River in 1979, as a part of the
National Loktak Multipurpose Project (officially commissioned in 1983), an artificial reservoir was
created. This resulted in permanent rise in the water level of this wetland, coupled with a vast
water spread throughout the year. The natural flow of water to and from the wetland was severely
altered by the creation of the barrage, affecting the hydrologic cycle of this delicately balanced
system.
The barrage constructed to create the artificial water reservoir for the Loktak Hydroelectric Project
(LHEP) maintained a constant water level at 768.5 mamsl (in peak season during the monsoon, the
water level is maintained at 769 mamsl). This level of water surface has resulted in huge tracts of
settlement and agricultural lands getting either submerged under water permanently or inundated
at regular intervals through the year whenever there is continuous heavy rainfall (3-5 days).
The effects of this on the local wildlife and people include:
1. Fish farms in the lake periphery owned by local farmers are constantly affected by flash floods
or sudden rise of lake water level during periods of heavy rains, often resulting in heavy loss of
fish.
2. The KLNP in the southern part of the lake has suffered extensively as a result of raised water
level. The entire Park area is subjected to frequent and regular flash floods, especially in the
monsoon months.
3. Back-flow effect of the Khuga River through the Ungamel channel towards the south of KLNP
has had adverse impact on the national park. Sudden water rise in the river after continuous
rainfall for up to 4-5 days hits the southern portion of KLNP with great force, and as a result the
floating biomass is ripped apart and the loose vegetation drifts off. This not only reduces the
vegetation cover in KLNP but also endangers the wildlife inhabiting in the Park. Occasionally, it
has been reported that wildlife like wild boar, hog deer and sangai were found to have strayed
out of the Park area on this drifting biomass and into human habitations, sometimes causing
injury to humans. Poachers take advantage of such situations to capture the wildlife.
4. A sharp increase in the number of fish culture ponds that has led to a profusion of vegetation
mass, depleting the areas which were earlier clear water zones. Clear water zones are essential
for the local people to meet basic water needs such as drinking, washing, bathing, sanitation,
etc.
5. On construction of the barrage, those people who earlier eked out a living through tilling the soil
started fishing, thus putting pressure on the already depleting aquatic resources.
6. Decreased fish catch has forced the fishermen to employ different techniques of fishing, such
as using closely knitted plastic nets of varying sizes and thickness bought from neighbouring
Burma. There is also an apparent increasing competition and tension amongst the fishermen for
the right to access particular areas of the lake. Fishermen are noticed to have put up bamboo
poles to demarcate their ‘land’ (i.e., waterbody) inside the lake.
 Manipur 419

7. The increase in the proportion of floating vegetation mass, while causing undesirable impact
such as the decrease in area of clear waterbody and affecting spill-over in lake shoreline areas,
is also encouraging an increase in undesired human activity such as the increase in number of
hutments, disturbances in the waterfowl habitat area (such as instances of poaching, poisoning
of the birds, collection of eggs, etc.), and obstruction in the traditional waterways. Massive
phumdi build-up is also causing blockage in the waterways used by the locals for traveling in
their dugout canoes from place to place across the lake.

Towards community conservation

The conservation efforts by the local communities are spread over different localities of Loktak lake
surface area. Legally most of the area under community conservation falls under the jurisdiction of
the Revenue Department of Manipur, which includes settlements, agricultural lands and fish farms
in the lake periphery.
The areas where community conservation is active are:
• The Birahari Pat Migratory waterfowl habitat (approximately 400 ha waterbody). This area is
located around 2-3 km offshore from the Khoijuman village on the western side of lake. The
single largest population of waterfowl seen here is the Uren porom (Common Coot);
• Keibul Lamjao National Park (KLNP) (4050 ha on the southern end of lake);
• Lake shoreline fish farms (Migratory waterfowl habitat, approx. 4-5 hectare area, covering around
4 to 6 km area in length) and adjacent waterbody in Nongmaikhong and Khordak village areas
(on the south-eastern side of lake and also south-east of KLNP). This area is outside the KLNP but
in its immediate proximity. Around 14 species of waterfowl and avifauna have been sighted in
this area. Some of the species are nganu thanggong (Ruddy Shelduck), nganu khara (Northern
Shoveller), thanggong mal (Eurasian wigeon), iruppi (ferruginous pochard), tharoichabi (Asian
openbill), meitunga (northern pintail), nganu pirel (spotbill duck), thoidingam (gadwall), utsai
saingou (grey heron), tingi (lesser whistling teal), etc.
The distance between the Nongmaikhong-Khordak community initiative area and the proposed
bird sanctuary at Pumlen Pat is less than half a kilometre, separated by the Manipur River. Pumlen
Pat is similar in its features to Loktak lake. The migratory waterfowl feeding in the Nongmaikhong-
Khordak area rest at Pumlen Pat at night.
The Loktak lake is associated with folk legends and cultural beliefs of the Manipuri people. The
religious temperament of the people finds expression in the different religious worships and folk art
performances, such as the projection of the Loktak Lake as the ‘mirror of Manipuri civilization‘.
The sangai is a legendary beast (as embodied in the form of Kangla Sha, which is the official
emblem of the Manipur government) is best explained as the representative cultural and social
identity of Manipur. The sangai is also the official state animal of Manipur. That is one of the
reasons that the conservation of the sangai and its habitat has been stressed upon by the local
people. Another reason is that it is today a precious asset of the state, found nowhere else in the
world. The sangai population had reduced to about 14 in 1974 in the state. According to a survey
in February 2003 there are now claimed to be 180 of them.1
The alarming results of the LHEP led to the initial stirrings of the need for conservation among
some locals and environmental groups in the mid-1980s. They (mainly the meiteis) realized and
decided to react to the undesired developments in the lake, which were detrimental to the health
of humans, wildlife and the lake ecosystem.
In the years following the commissioning of the Ithai barrage of LHEP, the local people living in
the lake area rose in agitation against the adverse impacts of the barrage, such as the artificial
case studies - manipur

flooding of their settlement lands and loss of their paddy fields. This mass movement ultimately
forced the Manipur government to set up the Loktak Development Authority (LDA) to address
some of the problems. However, the government neither had a concrete plan for conservation of
the lake ecosystem nor for the wildlife.
The vacuum created by the lack of a government policy on conservation of the wildlife was felt
by the local people living in the immediate vicinity of the KLNP, where there were several cases of
poaching and unnatural deaths of wildlife such as by drowning. This provided the impetus to the
local people to do something positive for the deteriorating conditions of the lake and the wildlife.
Around 1991, some of the concerned individuals and non-governmental organisations met and
decided to form a collective body for the cause of the lake and the wildlife dependent on the
lake. They formed an association called Environmental Social Reformation and Sangai Protection
420 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Forum—known as ESRSPF, or sometimes simply

as the Sangai Forum or just as the Forum—with
an initial membership of around 30 local youth
clubs and voluntary organizations based in the
KLNP and Loktak lake areas.
The issue of protection and conservation of
the much-revered sangai and the other wildlife
living in KLNP including the migratory waterfowl,
and the health of the lake, which is the source
of life and reverence for the people, were the
thrust of the campaign. The initiative progressed
slowly yet steadily. It gradually picked up from a
few individuals’ concern to a mass movement all
House on stilts, Loktak lake Photo: Ashish Kothari along the lake shoreline by the mid-1990s.
Grassroots-level public meetings, nature camps, workshops, etc. were organized by ESRSPF to
spread the message of the need to conserve the Loktak lake biodiversity. The locals received help
from Imphal-based environmental organisations, like the Manipur Association for Science and
Society (MASS), and experts from the Manipur University, Dhanamanjuri College of Science and
others. Efforts to highlight the plight of Loktak lake were made through various means like loud
protests, writings in newspapers and magazines, projection in films and video, ballads, lectures,
etc. at local, regional, national and international levels.
An annual ‘Loktak Day’ celebration is organised each year in October in places like Thanga,
Komlakhong and Nongmaikhong to highlight the conditions of the lake and the need to conserve it.
As a part of the celebration, meetings, seminars and cultural programmes are organised. Although
organised at the people’s level, this celebration has a political overtone in the sense that potential
politicians based in the Loktak lake area take the leading part in the celebrations.
Important conservation sites were identified by the locals themselves and with support from
the ESRSPF; these were subsequently decreed as ‘protected areas’ by a consensus of the local
communities. Local youth clubs and voluntary organisations together decided to monitor the areas
for possible violations, such as poaching, unauthorised entry into the national park, setting fire to
dry vegetation, etc. ESRSPF also set up units in critical spots like Keibul Lamjao, Nongmaikhong,
Thanga and Bishnupur. Since then, the entire locality, including youth, men and women, involve
themselves in the conservation of the specified areas.
In this way, several of the villages located around the southern parts of the lake joined in a
common effort to protect and conserve the KLNP and other adjoining areas that are important
wildlife habitats. Likewise, villages like Khoijuman located in the upper portion of the lake, and
Nongmaikhong-Khordak in the south-eastern part of the lake took up efforts to conserve the
migratory waterfowl habitat in the Birahari Pat. Most of the conservation occurs on privately owned
lands or water body area, not necessarily controlled by government agencies.
Local voluntary organisations under the banner of ESRSPF feel responsible for protection,
conservation and preservation of the Loktak Lake and its biodiversity. Government agencies like
the forest department and the Loktak Development Authority are much indebted to the services of
the ESRSPF volunteers in the protection and conservation of the wildlife and their habitats in KLNP
and surrounding areas.
In fact, where the forest department had failed to mobilise the locals for effectively controlling
poaching in KLNP, it has been due to the untiring efforts of the ESRSPF volunteers that poaching
in KLNP and in other parts of Loktak Lake has been greatly reduced in recent years.
On 19 January 2003, ESRSPF volunteers nabbed two poachers who had hunted sangai deer
inside KLNP. They were apprehended with around 4 kg of chopped deer meat, which the poachers
obviously intended to sell clandestinely. Both the poachers are from the Keibul Lamjao village. Both
of them were later handed over to the Moirang police station and a criminal case was registered
against them. Such activities serve to discourage potential hunters.
The conservation effort finds some amount of opposition from some of the primary stakeholders,
such as the local women who gather edible roots, plants and fodder grass from within the KLNP,
and fishermen whose fishing activities are restricted in those areas where the initiative is quite
active, like in the Birahari Pat area.
Although the status of a national park restricts locals from freely entering the core zone area of
KLNP, due to absence of proper demarcation of core, manipulation and buffer zones, some sort of
compromise has been made with the locals who traditionally collect plants for food and fodder from
 Manipur 421

the KLNP, and certain concessions are granted to the local people to enter and collect dry vegetation
and edible plants and roots from within the enclosure of the Park and in the surrounding areas.
When the national park came into force in 1977, there was strong opposition from the local
people when they were not allowed to enter the Park area and continue with their traditional
practice of collecting food and fodder plants. The tendency is still there in the sense that though
there has been some amount of understanding between PA managers and local people, the people
here, particularly the women, feel a certain resentment at the manner in which they are stopped
from continuing with their traditional practice, even while the forest department does not have
any management policy to regulate entry or allow people to enter up to a certain point in the
Park. The author has seen forest guards challenging women who had entered right up to the core
area to collect edible roots in March-April (this is the time when poaching inside the Park is most
active). This sort of act also causes tension between PA managers and the local people. However,
intervention by ESRSPF volunteers by way of organising meetings and talking to the people has
helped to reduce such tensions as and when they arise.
In the Birahari Pat conservation site, there is a certain amount of opposition from local fishermen
when they are asked not to disturb the migratory waterfowl, particularly during their winter resting
months. The opposition, though minimal, has arisen from the local fishermen’s need to cover a
large part of the lake for their fishing activities. This has been because the fish catch seems to
have gone down in the past few years. In fact, fishermen are resorting to the use of close-knitted
nylon nets to catch small fish (even fingerlings) since they are unable to catch big/bigger fish in
the lake.
There are also instances of conflict from adjacent communities who continue poaching/hunting
avifauna and waterfowl. In some of the poaching cases, it was found that some of the poachers
belonged to a different community from nearby Kwakta village, which is located about 4 km west
of Moirang town. Poaching is carried out in connivance with a few local persons living in the KLNP
area (e.g., the two poachers recently caught are both from the KLNP area). Poachers are known
to hunt the birds (and animals) and sell them to vendors in places like Kwakta, Moirang Lamkhai
and Imphal to supply restaurants, hotels, etc.
In the case of a poacher being caught red-handed by the locals in the KLNP area, he is immediately
handed over to the range officer of the Keibul Lamjao Forest Office. Then a meeting of the locals
from the village (Keibul Lamjao, and sometimes attended by villagers from neighbouring Chingmei
village), including the gram panchayat members, ESRSPF, forest officers and other important
persons in the village is held to discuss the situation. Normally the meeting is organised at the
Forest Range Office in Keibul Lamjao immediately an offence takes place. In most instances, the
cases are settled at the grassroots level itself without the intervention of the police or the district
magistrate. The collective meeting of these representatives decides on the nature of the penalty
to be awarded to the poachers.
The nature of penalty differs according to the extent of offence committed. The poacher is either
given a good thrashing and let off after a stern warning not to repeat his crime again, or the
poacher is made to pay a fine of Rs 10,000 (this amount was announced by the ESRSPF as penalty
to any person caught hunting sangai). In some cases, depending on the seriousness of the crime,
the poachers are handed over to the police for legal proceedings (but the locals are wary of such
legal proceedings because they feel nothing comes out of it).
Sometimes the penalty is harsh. If the matter is taken up by an underground group2 (it may
be noted that a certain underground group had earlier announced that it would award capital
punishment without trial to anyone found/caught hunting sangai), the poachers are liable to be
shot. The two poachers caught by ESRSPF volunteers on January 19 were punished by being shot
on their right thighs by the underground Revolutionary People’s Front as a (last) warning to anyone
daring to defy the group’s decree. (This incident happened on February 5, 2003 after both the
poachers were given bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bishnupur district). In 2003, another
case studies - manipur

valley-based Meitei insurgent group announced prohibition on hunting migratory waterfowl. They
also announced a punishment if the orders were violated.
In an incidence in 1999, a Kabui, also the headmaster of a local junior high school in Toubul
village, was apprehended with a gun and birds in his possession by volunteers of the Global
Science Club (GSC), Khoijuman. A meeting was held in Toubul village attended by the village
authority, GSC and ESRSPF members. In the meeting, the headmaster confessed his crime. Later,
he was pardoned on the condition that from that day onwards he would stop hunting birds and
would become a member of the GSC. He thus became a converted wildlife activist. This was an
achievement for the local conservationists.
The existing institution at the village level is the gram panchayat headed by a pradhan (village
422 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

head), assisted by the upa-pradhan (assistant to the village head) and members in the management
and administration of the village affairs. It is an important instrument for garnering support of
the local people and for dealing with matters concerning the activities of the local community as
regards the conservation initiative.
As in Nongmaikhong area, the panchayat members (earlier headed by former pradhan Salam
Budhi Singh) are quite active in the protection of the migratory waterfowl in the winter months
and for securing the support of local farmers to conserve their habitat. In the process, the farmers
are losing much of their source of income by letting the waterfowl feed in their fish farms while
foregoing all activity of fishing themselves.
In fact, there is a perpetual question of who will compensate them for the loss they are suffering
for the sake of the waterfowl. Farmers like Salam Budhi and a few others had voluntarily forsaken
the use of around a hectare each of their fish farms so that the waterfowl are not disturbed.
Currently they are losing fish yield from more than four hectares of fish farms in Nongmaikhong
village area.
As so far observed, these farmers are sacrificing themselves purely for the sake of the birds,
who, they say, are visitors from far-off places and who need their protection to feed and roost
without fear and disturbance. So, for the best part of December, January, February and March,
these farmers have to look for alternative sources of food and income while forgoing much of their
fishing activities in this area.
The women usually make water-reed mats and smoke small fish for sale to earn a living, while
the men engage themselves in farming activities or weaving bamboo baskets for sale, or go out
deep into the lake to fish so that minimal disturbance is caused to the waterfowl habitat. However,
during a visit in mid-January 2003, fishing activities were seen in the migratory waterfowl habitat.
Although the activity was minimal, this is evidently a result of the pressure on the farmers for their
livelihood needs.
For all the activities mentioned above, no formal rules have been laid down (barring the imposition
of fine on killing sangai). The initiative is based on a mutual understanding of the different village
communities and has been voluntarily taken up rather than through compulsion. Such a loose
structure and informal understanding has its own drawbacks, as it creates confusion particularly
when there is a conflict of interest and ideas among the different village communities regarding
the handling of particular cases.
Disputes, offences and other matters are dealt with by the panchayat, and in the case of non-
settlement of the issue at the village level the matter is recommended to the district magistrate for
due settlement. In most cases, petty matters are settled at the village level itself and the villagers
are ‘urged’ to comply with the panchayat’s decision(s). However, in most cases, it is the collective
decision of the villagers rather than the decision of the panchayat which is the final say.
This mechanism of governance at the grassroots is quite effective in the sense that the decisions
are made by the people themselves for their own good. In case of disregard of that collective
decision, the offender is likely to face pressure from the entire community.
There are also some Government interventions
in the area. For example the Loktak Development
Authority (LDA) was set up in 1987. LDA’s effort
has been to work on improving the water quality
of the lake, controlling the ever-expanding
vegetation matter, weeds, etc., and to establish
rapport with the local communities in working out
a common strategy for the overall conservation
of the lake ecosystem. Earlier, LDA’s activities
primarily were mainly engineering related, like
dredging of silt and clearing of vegetation matter
from the lake. These activities initially attracted
stiff opposition from the local people because
Traditional fishing near Loktak lake there was no consultation with the local people.
Photo: Ashish Kothari Ever since LDA has changed its strategy, it has
received support from the local communities in
conducting public awareness campaigns, nature camps, workshops, seminars, etc. towards the
purpose of conservation of the lake ecosystem.
Although the forest department (FD) also has jurisdiction in the area, they do not have any
concrete comprehensive plans for the area.
 Manipur 423

Impacts of community conservation

Where the Government had failed to establish rapport and a meaningful control and management
of the Park, the community was successful in bringing about a semblance of law and order in
the protected area. There have been several occasions when the ESRSPF launched a local-level
agitation against the forest department to protest against the inactiveness of the Department
towards the conservation of the sangai habitat, or to protest Loktak Development Authority’s
undesired engineering activity in the lake. However, Forest department officials do get support
from ESRSPF and other organisations during sangai census, control of poaching, etc.
There have been no direct benefits to the local communities as a result of their initiatives, except
for the small financial assistance from LDA for public motivation campaigns and community welfare
programmes like raising fish hatcheries, social forestry, community toilets, welfare schemes for
women, etc. The only benefit gained is the sense of pride in achieving some degree of success in
conserving the wildlife habitat and population, even though it is in the initial stages.
The initiative has been successful in achieving a more concerted effort towards preventing
poaching of sangai and other wildlife in the KLNP area. Over the last five years an increase has
been noticed in the numbers of migratory waterfowl coming to the area, and the population of wild
boar in the KLNP has also increased.

Opportunities and constraints

Some initiatives create certain problems, such as the waterfowl habitat conservation in Birahari
Pat and Nongmaikhong-Khordak areas, where the local fishermen have to stop their fishing, as it
puts pressure on the conserved area. They then have to seek other alternatives to earn their living.
Especially after losing their agricultural land as a result of the Loktak Project, the farmers find it
hard to forsake their fish farms. For them, it is just like becoming landless.
In a sense, it is the Manipuri sense of hospitality to visitors that seems to be at work here.
Despite the hardship of forgoing their source of livelihood, the farmers in Nongmaikhong say that
it would be thoughtless and heartless for them to drive away these winged visitors from faraway
places who had come to feed and roost here for the best part of four months. Although, as Salam
Budhi says, their families have to suffer on account of the waterfowl, they will continue to provide
shelter to the migratory waterfowl.
In the late 1980s the government set up a State Environmental Council chaired by the governor
and members consisting of representatives from the various government departments with a
few representatives from the public to look into the matter of environmental issues in the state.
But the council got defunct in 1991, and has not been revived till date. In the absence of such a
mechanism, initiatives by local communities for the conservation of Loktak lake’s biodiversity has
often clashed with interests of the government agencies like the forest department, LDA, Fisheries
Department, Irrigation & Flood Control Department, etc.
Unauthorized pattas (land ownership deeds) have been given to some people by the Bishnupur
District Revenue Office in areas which are part of the lake waterbody (i.e., the patta land is under
deep water!). This has given rise to conflicts between local conservationists and local fishermen
over the right of entry and activity in areas of waterfowl habitat (such as in the Birahari Pat
area).
Another development has been the ‘intrusion’ of politicians to gain political mileage from the
people’s campaigns. In fact, ESRSPF’s initiative recently took a political colouring with some activists
harping on the people’s movement to gain support for their elections to the state assembly. There
have since been efforts to restrict such overtures by aspiring politicians, and care is taken to keep
them at a distance.
case studies - manipur

Frequent fighting between wild boar and sangai (and perhaps hog deer too) for food and shelter
has been reported by the patrolling forest guards (this is caused by the decreasing vegetation
cover and edible plants, etc.). Sometimes, wild boars have strayed out of the KLNP area and
caused havoc in the nearby villages, damaging standing crops and injuring people. The responsible
government agencies have no management plans to prevent such incidents. The local youth clubs
and other voluntary organisations under the banner of the ESRSPF have taken it upon themselves
to keep a watch-out for such mishaps.
ESRSPF had assisted the LDA in conducting a 3-month-long flora study and data compilation of
the vegetation mass in KLNP. ESRSPF, in association with environmental groups, conducts periodic
monitoring and study of the wildlife including annual migratory waterfowl and sangai census. Other
than this, local organisations like Global Science Club (Khoijuman), Generation De New Image
424 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

(Ningthoukhong), Loktak Lake Environmental Development Organisation (Thanga), etc. conduct

periodic studies of the wildlife habitats, the lake’s ecological character, etc. and interact with the
local communities on their findings.

Conclusions and recommendations

Suggested recommendations for effective conservation:
• Government agencies such as the forest department, the Loktak Development Authority, the
Fisheries Department, the Rural Development & Panchayati Raj Department, the Social Welfare
department, the Health & Family Welfare Department, etc. should coordinate with each other
to initiate welfare programmes for the local communities with the objective of encouraging the
locals towards Loktak lake biodiversity/wildlife conservation.
• Set up scientific study cells to monitor the Loktak lake ecosystem, periodic and regular water
quality monitoring, study of hydrology of lake and feeder streams, change in vegetation character,
wildlife behavior, etc.
• Set up a coordinating body of the local communities and government agencies to work on a
mutually accepted module of policy strategy and conservation methodology, and so on.

This case study has been contributed by Salam Rajesh, an independent researcher, in 2004.

For more details contact:

Salam Rajesh
Sagolband Salam Leikai,
Imphal 795001, Manipur.
email: salamrajesh@rediffmail.com

Individuals representing local groups

i) H. Meghachandra, General Secretary ESRSPF, Thanga Khunjen Leikai, P.O. Moirang, Bishnupur District, Manipur.
Tel: +91-0385-953879-62601 (R).
ii) Salam Budhi Singh, ex-pradhan, Kha-Thinunggei Gram Panchayat, Nongmaikhong Village, P.O. Moirang,
Bishnupur District, Manipur
iii) Laishram Shamungou, Khoijuman Mamang Leikai, P.O. Bishnupur Bazar, Bishnupur district, Manipur.
iv) Oinam Birathoi (phum hut dweller), Birahari Pat off Khoijuman village, Bishnupur district.
Relevant government office(s)
i) Project Director, Loktak Development Authority, Leiren Mansion, Lamphelpat 795 004, Manipur. Tel: 2321784
(R). Tel/fax: 385-410631. Email: lda@neline.com.
ii) Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Wildlife Wing), Department of Forest, Government of Manipur, Head-office:
Sanjenthong, Imphal 795 001. Tel: 385-223662.
NGOs/NGIs involved
i) Environmental Social Reformation and Sangai Protection Forum, Keibul Lamjao, P.O. Moirang,
Bishnupur District, Manipur.
ii) Manipur Association for Science and Society, Integration House, Dolphin Road, Wangkhei Thangapat, Imphal 795
001, Manipur. Tel: 385-223610 (R)/220847, 220787 (O).
iii) Nongmaikhong Youth Club, Nongmaikhong, P.O. Moirang, Bishnupur District, Manipur.
iv) Global Science Club, Khoijuman Mamang Leikai, P.O. Bishnupur, Bishnupur District, Manipur.
v) Generation De New Image, Ningthoukhong Bazar, P.O. Bishnupur, Bishnupur District, Manipur.
vi) Loktak Lake Environmental Protection Organisation, Thanga Khunjen Leikai, P.O. Moirang, Bishnupur District,
Manipur.
vii) Phum Hut dwellers of Birahari Pat area, Bishnupur District.

Endnotes
1
C. Duangel (2003), ‘State Formulates New Forest Policy’, Sangai Express, Imphal, 9 May 2003.
2
The underground groups in Manipur are demanding political autonomy for the state and have gone underground to
evade persecution.
 CCA/Manipur/CS2/Senapati/Upper Ngatan/Forest regeneration

Upper Ngatan, Senapati

Background
Upper Ngatan village is located in Senapati district of Manipur. The nearest town is Senapati.
Since 2004, the village has been protecting about 4sq km (400ha) of dense tropical semi evergreen
forest on lower altitude and sub-tropical on the higher altitude.
The protected forest was primarily a jhum (shifting cultivation) field where jhuming was heavily
practiced. Because of large land holding per capita and less population the jhum cycle (returning
to the same field for cultivation) was very long (20-25 years). The long jhum cycle ensured a high
regeneration of the forest. The protected forests are therefore very rich in wildlife even today.
Ngatan is a very old settlement of the maram (naga) communities. The village is nearly 600
years old as per the oral history of the village. The first settlers to this village came from the Maram
Khullen village in this region. Ngatan now has two localities, viz. Upper and Lower Ngatam with a
total of about 90 households. The present case study is from the Upper Ngatam having about 50
households. Both the villages now have separate governance system.

Towards community conservation

Land pressure, increased population and economic upscaling of the community have resulted in
the rampant extraction of forest resources in this area. The village had a traditional community-
reserved forest which was seen as a common property resource reserved for people to use in
emergency. But sustainable management aspects or conservation principles were not employed
while extracting the resources. There were certain regulations but these were practically never
enforced or implemented. Due to these social and other pressures, the local forests and community
reserves were severely depleted in most of the accessible areas, except deep ravines and other
difficult areas. It is in this context that NERCORMP-IFAD1 came to this village in 2004.
NERCORMP-IFAD constituted a natural resource management group (NaRMG) from within the
community. Orientation and sensitization programmes were organized, which included, need for
revitalization of the village reserved forest, new challenges faced by the community, need for
economic development through increased conservation, among others. The NaRMG leaders also
attended a natural resource management (NRM) sensitization workshop conducted by Senapati
District Community Resource Management Society (SEDCORMS), the project implementing agency
of NERCORMP-IFAD in Senapati district. The leaders realized the importance of natural resource
management. They then initiated a dialogue with the members of the traditional village institution,
looking after the village land and all natural resources. All the members of the village institution
were eventually convinced of the need and importance of revitalizing the village forest reserves.
During the resource mapping and land use planning exercise the community found that it was
very important to have a certain portion of the forest as protected for future use as the forest
resources are on the decline while population is fast increasing. The NaRMGs in consultation with
the traditional village authority declared the following forests as reserve area and designated it as
community conserved area (CCA).
1. Community reserve forest at Ting Ngai Vai Pou
2. Cane or rattan germplasm reserve at Tommaina river bank
case studies - manipur

According to the villagers the reasons for conserving these areas include the following:
1. The area has a good growth of cane or rattan which are becoming extinct in other areas due to
overexploitation.
2. To gain respect from the surrounding villages for their reserve forest.
3. To regulate and prohibit indiscriminate cutting of trees by individuals without permission of the
village authority.
4. To frame rules and regulations applicable to all the villagers irrespective of their position and
status.
425
426 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

5. To regulate and prohibit hunting and fishing by outsiders in their area.

6. To conserve forest for future use.
7. To conserve water which is crucial for terrace cultivation.
8. To regulate collection of non-timber forest produce (NTFP).
The NaRMG and the traditional village authority constituted from amongst their members a reserve
forest management committee (RFMC), which is empowered to settle forest related disputes.
The rules and regulations were framed on the basis of the customary laws and traditional
practices, which are widely accepted by the community. The rules and regulations were passed in
the meeting on the 10th of September 2004 along with the penalties and fines for violations. It
was decided that, if need be, the rules and regulations could be amended during the village annual
meetings. The fines and penalties in this NaRMG are very low as compared to other NaRMGs
because of less conflicts in this village.
The fines and penalties on the defaulters as per their resolution no. 2, dated 10/9/04 are:
a. Cutting of trees = Rs 500/-
b. Setting of fire = Rs. 500/-
c. Hunting of animal = Rs. 1000/-
However the forest management committee may increase or decrease the fines depending on
the degree of violation and the intention of the defaulter.
The rules and regulations are pro-poor as they do allow poor families to collect honey, dead
wood, mushroom, medicinal plants and collection of cane and rattan saplings for sale during the
season.

Impacts of community effort

The conservation effort has strengthened the unity of the village. Despite being a small village
they have managed to protect their forests and prevented hunting in the protected area. Till
2006, the forest committee had confiscated two guns from Sorbung villagers for hunting in their
reserved forest. According to Hingba, a villager, “this programme is more powerful than hundred
underground cadres.” Another villager adds “this project has really helped us to remain united and
protect our forest for future use.” While another villager believes that, “The spirit of nature will
strike on those who are too greedy.”
As the area is now conserved the trees and bamboo are likely to mature within a decade or
so, provide the villagers for their domestic and economic needs. An increase in wildlife especially
deer, and birds within the last few years have also been noticed. There is increasing recognition
of their efforts from the neighboring villages, which is a great source of encouragement for the
community.

Opportunities and constraints

In due course of time, the community will require to prepare a working scheme for their forests,
if and when they would like to extract timber from the area. They would require the help of the
government to prepare such working schemes.
The major constraint is that such efforts of the communities are yet to have due legal recognition
of the government. The communities also do not get any financial incentives for such efforts.
Absence of these incentives could be one of the possible future reasons for their inability to expand
the areas under conservation. The NaRMGs are constrained as these are only project-induced
village institutions without any legal recognition (meaning not registered under any act). However,
the village authority has fully empowered the NaRMG to be the key stakeholder in the management
of their village reserved forest.

Conclusion
Conservation can be taken forward to benefit the communities socially, economically and
environmentally. The government should recognize and give legal management rights of community
reserved forests to the NaRMGs with financial support.
 Manipur 427

This case study has been contributed by Vincent Darlong, Mathias Kuba, Lokho Pfoze, and
Tutumoni Lyngdoh, all with the North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project
of the International Fund for Agricultural Development in June 2007.

For more details contact:

Vincent Darlong
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas [NERCORMP-
IFAD],
“Sympli Building”,
Dhankheti,
Shillong 793 001,
Meghalaya
Ph: 0364-2503531, 2500495
Email: drvtdarlong2002@yahoo.co.in

Tutumoni Lyngdoh
(As above)

Mathias Kuba
Senapati District Community Resource Management Society [NERCORMP-IFAD],
P.O. Senapati,
Senapati District,
Manipur.
Ph: 03878-222562

Lokho Pfoze
(As above)

Endnotes
1
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas (NERCORMP) is a Joint Project
of International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the Government of India, Ministry of Development
of North Eastern Region, North East Council, Shillong, Meghalaya. For more details on the programme, see www.
necorps.org.

case studies - manipur

 CCA/Manipur/CS3/Ukhrul/Khambi/Forest regeneration

Khambi village, Ukhrul

Background
Khambi village is 4 km south of Phungyar town in Kamjong sub-division of Ukhrul district, roughly
70 km north-east of Imphal. This village is inhabited by the Tangkhul tribe. The village forest under
protection comprises a hill south of the village and is nearly 300 ha in area.

Towards community conservation

Before the villagers’ effort at conservation, the hill was largely degraded, with intensive use
for firewood, timber, etc. by the villagers. Degradation of the forest resulted in drying up of the
watersources in the village, which compelled the village to decide to relocate to another site. This
decision was vehemently opposed by the village elders, who suggested that the catchment of the
watersource should be regenerated to bring water back to the village. Thus the village started
protecting the degraded patch.
In an attempt to regenerate the degraded forest, the village authority strictly enforced a rule that
no live trees should be cut in the forests without permission. It was decided that for every tree cut
without permission, an initial fine of Rs 500 would be levied. A consecutive ‘offence’ by the same
individual was punishable with an increase in fine. As the villagers could not afford to pay in cash,
the penalty was imposed in kind – a pig. Thus a first offence would attract a fine of a small pig
costing around Rs 500. The second offence would cost a juvenile pig costing around Rs 1000. The
third offence would cost a mature pig costing around Rs 13,0001. The villagers normally refrain
from committing any offence in the protected forest, and if need be approach the village authority
for permission. Permission is sometimes granted for cutting dead or mature trees. The authority
does not allow hunting of wild animals in the protected forest area. If an animal being chased for
hunting outside the protected forest takes refuge in this patch, it is spared.

Impacts of community conservation

The protection efforts started in 1990 and have paid off as the forest has now regenerated
(natural regeneration plus a few plantation). The water source has revived and is protected strictly
by the villagers. There are huge trees now, including planted local species like champaca and
bonsum. The author of this study feels that this area is one of the best community conservation
efforts that he has come across so far in Manipur.

This case study has been contributed by Salam Rajesh, independent researcher, in 2004.

For more details contact:

Salam Rajesh
Sagolband Salam Leikas
Imphal 795001
case studies - manipur

Manipur
E-mail: salamrajesh@rediffmail.com

Endnotes
1
The penalty in traditional form is in terms of a wai where a wai is a measurement by holding the two hands to
measure the body circumference of the pig. So, one wai=a small pig, 1-3 months old. 3 wais=a juvenile pig. 5 wais
(the maximum fine)=a mature pig that could cost anywhere between Rs 12,000 and Rs 15,000.

428
 CCA/Manipur/CS4/Ukhrul/Mapum/Forest regeneration

Mapum village, Ukhrul

Background
Mapum village is located at the eastern foothill of Shirui Kashong Peak which is 74km away
from Ukhrul district. The village is constituted of 134 households. This area is the only corridor for
animal migration from Ango-hill range (in Myanmar) to this district. Jhum (shifting cultivation) is
the main activity in the village. The village is occupied by the tangkhul (naga) tribe. Like many
other indigenous communities in this area, forest management has been basically for the purpose
of shifting cultivation in this village. Hunting and selling of dry meat was one of their main sources
of income in the village until recently.
The village is about 600 years old. Over the years the practice of jhum has became unsustainable
due to reduced cultivation cycles (returning to the same patch before it could regenerate fully). Not
only did food security become a problem, but water and firewood scarcity also became acute in the
village. Villagers had to go as far as 4-5km for collection of fuelwood. The situation was particularly
difficult for women. It was in this scenario that the IFAD-funded North Eastern Region Community
Resource Management Project for Upland Areas (NERCORMP-IFAD)1 came to this village in the year
2001. Mobilization and capacity building for conservation started by forming a natural resource
management group (NaRMG) and self help groups (SHGs).

Towards community conservation

The programme helped the NaRMG and village council (VC, the main decision making body in
the village) members to create awareness and initiate discussions about revival of the traditional
practice of protecting a patch of forest as village reserved forests. The problems faced by women in
collecting drinking water and firewood and consequent impact on each household was deliberated
upon to convince villagers of the importance and value of protecting a critical catchment area and
water resource. The local NGOs facilitated this process. The NaRMG and VC jointly began discussing
demarcation of the boundaries and drafting of rules and regulations best suited to their village.
One important rule was that the households could extract the natural resources for their own
consumption but not for sale outside the village. Prevention of forest fire was another key area
of deliberation, and stringent penalty for violators was decided. The village has formulated a
perspective plan for biodiversity conservation in their protected forests and the surrounding area.

Impacts of community effort

NERCORMP-IFAD project in this village has brought in changes in the social, human, financial,
physical and natural capitals or assets of the community. The project also brought in the idea
of conserving part of their village forest as community forests or community conserved areas
for their biodiversity and environmental values. Alternative sources of livelihoods have provided
them opportunities to increase their income without having to cut their forest for jhum as was the
practice before the project interventions. NERCORMP-IFAD also took up development of terrace
fields in this village and now about 50% of the households have terrace fields for paddy cultivation
and so practice settled agriculture. These activities have actually reduced their dependency on
forest for livelihoods, consequently the conserved area is regenerating successfully. The villagers
anticipate eventual ecological and economical benefits from the conserved area.
case studies - manipur

Opportunities and constraints

The village community is now well mobilized for conservation and is realizing and experiencing
the benefits of their efforts. The area is rich in wildlife as it is contiguous with neighbouring Shirui
forest area. The villagers report presence of leopard, bear, deers, slow loris, hoolock gibbon,
tragopan, wild fowl, porcupine among others in their reserved forest and the neighbouring forest
areas. The main vegetation is alder, pine, oak, taxus among others.
One major constraint to biodiversity conservation in this area is that the neighbouring villages
are not covered under the NERCORMP-IFAD project. Many of the individuals in these neighbouring
429
430 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

villages continue to hunt and trap animals. Unless, these neighbouring villages are also covered
under such project or massive awareness programmes, the isolated efforts of Mapum village may
not yield desired results or conservation goals.

Conclusion
Biodiversity conservation will be much more fruitful if small incentives could be provided to
the NaRMG. The forest committee members are safeguarding the village forest in every possible
way without any honorarium. Several attempts to converge their efforts with some government
programme have not yielded any encouraging results. If biodiversity conservation programmes
have to be taken forward, forest-based livelihoods must be given priority by the government.
There are likely to be many endemic and endangered species in this area. There is an urgent need
for proper survey of flora and fauna. However the community members do not have any expertise
in this field nor do they have needed support to undertake such work. It may be mentioned that
the famous shirui lily occurs in this area.

This case study has been contributed by Vincent Darlong and Tutumoni Lyngdoh of IFAD
and Thingreiphi and Selim Keishing of the Ukhrul District Community Resource Management
Society in June 2007.

For more details contact:

Vincent Darlong
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas [NERCORMP-
IFAD],
“Sympli Building”,
Dhankheti,
Shillong 793 001,
Meghalaya
Ph: 0364-2503531, 2500495
Email: drvtdarlong2002@yahoo.co.in

Tutumoni Lyngdoh
(As above)

Thingreiphi
Ukhrul District Community Resource Management Society [NERCORMP-IFAD],
P.O. Ukhrul,
Ukhrul District,
Manipur.
Ph: 03870-22183

Selim Keishing
(As above)

Endnotes
1
North Easter Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas (NERCOMP) is a Joint Project
of International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the Government of India, Ministry of Development
of North Eastern Region, North East Council, Shillong, Meghalaya. For more details on the programme, see www.
necorps.org.
 CCA/Manipur/CS5/Ukhrul/Ngainga/Forest regeneration

Ngainga village, Ukhrul

Background
This village is located in the western part of Ukhrul district which is approximately 17km from the
district headquarters. The total area of the village is 2348.17ha. Presently 170 households reside
in this village. People of this village mostly depend on agriculture including shifting cultivation
(jhum) and settled cultivation (terrace), forest produce and weaving. The village is occupied by
the tangkhul (naga) tribe.
The village is about 400 years old. Conservation of a green belt at the vicinity of the village or
surrounding the village is a common practice in most of the tangkhul villages since time immemorial.
The forests around the village were protected basically for the security and safety of the village,
either from fire and/or enemies during the days of head-hunting. But with increasing population
and land pressure, the practice has been gradually eroding. In the recent times such safety
forests have been converted to agro-horticulture plots or used for extraction of timbers for income
generation. Ngainga has been no exception to this. This village is also known for notorious charcoal
business. Due to proximity to the Ukhrul town, forest products like fuelwood, bamboo, bamboo
shoot, timber, among others were over extracted. This was also due to weakening of traditional
governance systems. All these activities contributed to destruction of forest and the village forests
were left severely degraded by the late nineties. People of Ngainga began to experience acute
shortage of water and the good quality firewood was not enough to meet the demands throughout
the year.
Under these circumstances, the IFAD-funded North Eastern Region Community Resource
Management Project for Upland Areas (NERCORMP-IFAD)1 came to this village in the year 2000. As
part of the project NERCORMP-IFAD constituted a natural resource management group (NaRMG)
from within the community. This group was given capacity building training and also awareness
was raised about the importance of protecting biodiversity and natural resources. Under the project
water supply was taken up in 2001-2002. Even with this development, the villagers could not get
water throughout the year as the water sources would dry up in dry season. With the awareness
packages provided to the community, they started linking non-availability of water with rampant
deforestation. It was in this scenario that the villagers decided to conserve the catchment area
of the water resources along with their traditional reserved forest. As a result the village is now
protecting a patch of 142.92ha.

Towards community conservation

Mobilization and capacity building started with the entry of the NERCORMP-IFAD project in this
village. The Ukhrul District Community Resource Management Society (UDCRMS) implemented the
project. The process started with training on participatory rural appraisal (PRA) tools for community-
led planning. The community-based institution called the natural resource management group
(NaRMG) was set up in the village where husband and wife from each household were the primary
members. The village has three primary NaRMGs under one common village NaRMG and five self
help groups (SHGs) under a village federation. The NaRMGs meet at least once in a month. All
meeting proceedings and resolutions adopted in the process are recorded. According to the NaRMG
guidelines, a resolution can be adopted only when at least 70% or more members are present in
the meeting. Thus, the process for conservation of forest and biodiversity were initiated by the
case studies - manipur

NaRMGs, which were then nurtured and supported by NERCORMP-IFAD along with UDCRMS. The
NaRMG also took into confidence the village council (VC), the traditional village decision making
body, while taking the resolution about protection of the reserved forest.
Under the programme, awareness workshops and seminars have been conducted at the district
level in order to re-enforce and strengthen such processes in the villages. The benefits of such
practices are deliberately and purposefully discussed and taken up by the project at all level of
community meetings and discussions. Saplings for plantations are taken from the state forest
department (FD).
Like Ngainga, in many other villages both the NaRMG and the VC have decided to strengthen the
process of community forest management and the governance systems. They have also constituted
431
432 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

a forest committee to manage the reserved forests. The village forest committee members take
turns to inspect the forest. Customary rules and regulations have been revisited and re-written in
most villages based on new learning and awareness through the NERCORMP-IFAD. All the rules
and regulations, which are usually preventive, prohibitive and punitive in nature, are discussed in
the NaRMG meetings for wider understanding and appreciation. Village youth are also informed
about these rules and regulations through customary channels and procedures.

Impacts of community effort

The villagers in Ngainga are witnessing ecological benefits but they also anticipate some economic
benefits. They are planning to keep their reserved forest as a wildlife sanctuary, which they feel
will benefit them ecologically and economically as well. One of the major benefits of conservation
has been the availability of water throughout the year to all the households in all the localities of
the village. The households also extract edible plants for vegetables from the protected forests.
Collection for sale or export outside the village is prohibited. The rules are more relaxed for the
poorer in the community, who can harvest non-timber forest products (NTFP) and small timber for
construction and repairs of their houses, without paying anything to the village authority.

Opportunities and constraints

The conservation efforts are yielding very quick results. The forest is regenerating very quickly,
enhancing the ecological and economic benefits from these forests. There are a few mature trees
that can be harvested now if the village prepares a working scheme (management plan) for the
area.
Since the village is close to Ukhrul town, they can also benefit from sustainably harvesting and
selling edible plants and vegetables. Socially too, the communities are now well motivated towards
conservation of their forests.
The constraints are primarily elements of poverty and need for increased cash income for
education of children and other human development requirements. Sale of forest products is one
of the few means of income for many of the poor households, thus increasing the pressures on
the forests. The other constraint is non-availability of planting materials, even if the communities
would like to undertake plantations within and outside the protected forests.

Conclusion
The efforts of the villagers towards managing and protecting their reserved forests will be much
more fruitful if small incentives could be provided to the NaRMG members. The forest committee
is safeguarding the village forest in every possible way without any honorarium or additional
incentives for such commendable voluntary activities. The youth and young children need to be
explained the meaning and benefits of such conservation efforts by the elders within the village.

This case study has been contributed by Vincent Darlong, Thingreiphi, Selim Keishing and
Tutumoni Lyngdoh from the North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project
of the International Fund for Agricultural Development in June 2007.

For more details contact:

Vincent Darlong
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas [NERCORMP-
IFAD],
“Sympli Building”,
Dhankheti,
Shillong 793 001,
Meghalaya
Ph: 0364-2503531, 2500495
Email: drvtdarlong2002@yahoo.co.in

Tutumoni Lyngdoh
(As above)
 Manipur 433

Thingreiphi
Ukhrul District Community Resource Management Society [NERCORMP-IFAD],
P.O. Ukhrul,
Ukhrul District,
Manipur.
Ph: 03870-22183

Selim Keishing
(As above)

Endnotes
1
North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project for Upland Areas (NERCORMP) is a Joint Project
of International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the Government of India, Ministry of Development
of North Eastern Region, North East Council, Shillong, Meghalaya. For more details on the programme, see www.
necorps.org.

case studies - manipur

 CCA/Manipur/CS6/Ukhrul/Shirui/Species protection

Shirui Hill, Ukhrul

Background
Shirui Hill, with an altitude of 2570 m, is located in Shirui village of Ukhrul District of Manipur.
The rare and endangered siroy lily is the state flower of Manipur. Shirui peak (and the lily) are
known by different names, each slightly different from the others: Siroy, Shiroi, Sirohee and
Shirui, the last one being the local pronunciation. The hill is a part of the Shirui-Kashong range,
which is proposed to be a national park under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. It is one of the
only two places in Manipur that the Siroy lily is found, and even here only for a couple of months
following mid-May every year. The area is also known to be inhabited by endangered bird species
like the Blyth’s tragopan and Mrs. Hume’s bar-backed pheasant or nongyin, Manipur’s state bird.
Such widespread flowering of lilies as is seen today could not be seen between 1994-5 and 1999-
2000, when hardly 3-4 mature lilies were found in bloom. The huge numbers of visitors visiting
the area during this season would flatten the beds and pluck and uproot the lilies. This resulted in
a sharp decline of lilies in bloom.

Towards community conservation

Since the year 2000, the Shiroi Youth Club (a local club based at the Shirui village which is
nearest to the site) has been tirelessly protecting the site. Among the steps that the youth club
members took to protect the lilies were: checking the visitors, guarding the site as volunteers,
putting up barbed-wire fencing around the site, levying a fine of Rs 50 for every lily plucked and Rs
500 for every lily plant uprooted. The hard work of the Shiroi Youth Club has borne fruit and after
a gap of nearly 11 years widespread flowering of the lily can be seen again.

Constraints and opportunities

The greatest threat to this rare lily is from the large influx of tourists. In the flowering season
there are busloads of young students or other tourists. Tourists are not only loud and rowdy but
also end up trampling many budding lilies. Despite enough signs pointing towards the need to
conserve and protect the habitat, many tourists deliberately pluck lilies to take back home for their
‘loved ones’.

This case study has been compiled from information provided by Salam Rajesh, independent
researcher based in Manipur (in 2002), and Kanchi Kohli, a member of Kalpavriksh Environment
Action Group, based in Delhi (in 2004).

For more information contact:

Salam Rajesh
Sagolband Salam Leikai,
case studies - manipur

Imphal-795001, Manipur.
email: salamrajesh@rediffmail.com

Kanchi Kohli
Kalpavriksh 134, Tower 10,
Supreme Enclave
Delhi-110091
Ph: +91 11 22753714
Siroy lily
Email:kanchi@hathway.com; kanchikohli@gmail.com Photo: Kanchi Kohli

434
Meghalaya
Meghalaya - an introduction
Location and biogeography
Meghalaya is a Sanskrit term; meaning ‘abode of the clouds’. Meghalaya attained statehood
on 21 January 1972. Meghalaya comprises the South Garo Hills, West Garo Hills, East Garo Hills,
West Khasi Hills, East Khasi Hills, Ribhoi and Jaintia Hills districts lying between 25o47’ to 26o10’ N
latitude and 89o45’ to 92o45’ E longitude, and covers an area of 22,429 sq km1. It is bounded on
the north, east and west by Assam and on the south by Bangladesh.
The altitude ranges from 50 to 1960 m. The highest peak is Shillong Peak. The climate of
Meghalaya is very much influenced by its topography. The mean maximum and mean minimum
temperatures are 24.3°C and 17.8°C respectively.
The average annual rainfall in western Meghalaya is 268.90 cm, with regional variations: south-
east Meghalaya above 400 cm; in the north 250 to 300 cm; and in the Shillong plateau very high
at 719.6 cm. Mawsynram, a village situated on a similar plateau as the Cherra plateau, about 16
km west to Cherrapunjee, records the highest annual rainfall in the world with 1,392.30 cm.
The important mineral deposits of the state are iron, limestone, coal, siliminite and uranium.
Simsang, Manda, Damring, Janjiram, Ringge Gano Khri, Umtrew, Umiam, Umkhem, Umngot are
the major rivers of the state.
Meghalaya is sub-divided into five agro-climatic sub-zones: i) Hills and northern slope ii) Central
hyperthermic plateau iii) Central thermic plateau iv) Southern slopes and valleys (east) and v)
Southern slopes and valleys (west). Some of the forest types are tropical evergreen, semi-evergreen,
tropical moist and dry deciduous, bamboos savannah grasslands, temperate and pine.
The recorded forest cover of the state is 16,839 sq km, i.e., 75.05 per cent of the total geographic
area as per the Forest Survey of India 2003. Out of this, Reserve Forest area belonging to the State
Forest Deparment is only 981 sq km (4.37 per cent of the total area of the state). About 8503 sq
km (37.91 per cent of the total area of the state) falls under the unclassed areas, belonging to
communities, individuals and district councils. Meghalaya has nearly 40 per cent of its land under
shifting cultivation.

Biodiversity
Meghalaya has 139 species of mammals, 540 species of birds, 94 species of reptiles, 33 species
of amphibians and 152 species of fishes. Of these, 35 species of mammals are endangered,
vulnerable, and those about which there is insufficient knowledge to figure their status. Similarly
10 species of birds and nine species of reptiles are either endangered or vulnerable.

Socio-economic profile
The main inhabitants (85 per cent) of this region are the Indigenous tribes like the Khasis,
the Garos and the Jaintias, but besides these tribes the Karbis, Mikirs and other smaller tribes
state chapter - meghalaya

like the Hajongs, Kochs and Rabhas are present. The most remarkable
social institution of the Khasis and Garos is the system of matriarchy
or matrilineality. A characteristic feature of this system was the
succession of the youngest daughter, called ‘Ka Khadduh’, to
the property of the family. Though a majority of the people are
Christians, it is to be noted that there are sections of society that still
follow their own respective traditional customs or ‘Niam Tynrai’ of
performing rituals. Garo, Khasi and English are the main languages
of the state.
The state has a population of about 2,318,822 according to the
2001 census. 85.9 per cent of the population belongs to Scheduled
Tribes. Major parts of the population are rural folk. Meghalaya is
437
438 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

basically an agricultural state, with about 80 per cent of the total population depending entirely
on agriculture for their livelihood. The other occupations in the state are cattle rearing, poultry,
silkworm rearing, weaving and pig rearing. In the uplands, jhum (slash and burn) is the only
method of cultivation. People employed in government or private service dominate the urban
sectors.
The lands are broadly divided into two classes: Ri Raid (belonging to the communities) and Ri
Kynti (belonging to the clan or individual).

Administrative and political profile

Meghalaya is covered under the Sixth Schedule of the Consitution of India (under Articles 244
(2) and 275 (1)) with special governance under three autonomous councils: the Garo Hills District
Council (HDC), Khasi HDC and Jaintia HDC.2
The District Councils enjoy legislative, executive and judicial powers mainly over land and
forest outside reserve forests, regulation of the practice of jhum, use of land or water-courses
for agricultural purposes and other aspects of cultural importance. Syiem , Lyngdoh, Wahadadar,
Dolloi and Sirdar are some traditional administration systems in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills.
There are seven districts, 32 blocks, 12 towns and 5,780 villages in the state. The urban local
bodies in the state include municipal boards and town committees. Meghalaya is represented by
two members in the Lok Sabha and by one member in the Rajya Sabha.
The major threats to the forests and water resources of the state are mining and quarrying, jhum,
charcoal making, limestone- and coal-processing, fuelwood and timber extraction, construction of
reservoirs and dams, pollution of streams and rivers, and poisoning of aquatic systems for fishing.
Jhum, though in itself a sustainable form of land use, is now viewed as a major threat to the
natural ecosystems, mainly due to reduction in jhum cycles3 and increasing population pressures.

Conservation
The conservation initiatives by forest department include two national parks (Nokrek and
Balphakram), 3 wildlife sanctuaries (Siju, Jarain Pitcher Plant and Baghmara Pitcher Plant ), 1
elephant reserve (Garo Hills) and 1 biosphere reserve (Nokrek 820 sq km, as part of Garo Hills).4
Nine sites in the state have been assigned a status of Important Bird Areas (IBA) by Indian Bird
Conservation Network (IBCN).5 Also, Rit Khwan–Umiam Lake is a proposed Ramsar Site.6
There are about 101 sacred groves, spread over a total of about 10,000 ha, scattered all over
the state (mainly in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills). The sacred groves of Meghalaya are located in the
public lands set aside for religious purpose under the traditional land use system. Sacred groves
enjoy adequate legal support as they are covered by the United Khasi and Jaintia Hills Autonomous
District (Management and Control of Forests) Act, 1958.
Along with the conservation of sacred groves in the state, traditional institutions have taken up
several initiatives for conservation. There are several self-imposed bans by local durbars (village
councils) operational in the state: e.g., ban on the use of plastics, self-imposed moratorium on
felling of trees, self-imposed moratorium on fishing, self-imposed moratorium on goat keeping,
social fencing for conservation, etc.
A number of citizens’ groups and non-governmental organizations are working in the state on
environmental awareness, advocacy, conservation and capacity building.

Box 1
Some other conservation initiatives with and by people in Meghalaya7
Village reserves are commonplace among the upland communities (and some
plains communities) of North-East India. Most communities traditionally
earmark forests for various purposes: wild edibles, catchment,
fuelwood, etc. Some villages have reserves for conservation of
wildlife as well. For example, the Hoolock gibbon, the only ape found
in India, is regarded as an omen of good luck and hence the Garo
villages normally tend to conserve small patches of forests and trees
 Meghalaya 439

for the gibbons. Not very far from Selbagre is Chandigre (in the buffer of Nokrek biosphere
reserve), where villagers have conserved a patch for the gibbons. However, in the recent past,
there has been pressure on habitats, mainly due to the expansion of cash crop plantations and
the shortening of the jhum fallow cycles (which do not leave sufficient time for the forests to
regenerate), and such village reserves have also come under pressure. In recent times a few
government projects such as the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) have
worked towards reviving some such initiatives in Meghalaya. The IFAD project villages have
conserved significant areas as catchment forests, elephant reserves and corridors, and fish
sanctuaries on the Simsang river.

Conservation programmes with the local communities are also being initiated by other NGOs, for
example the Community Elephant Conservation and Community Elephant Population Monitoring
programmes of Samrakshan, based in South Garo Hills.8
A tribal village in Selbalgre has been encouraged to revive their tradition of forest reserves for
the Hoolock gibbons by the Wildlife Trust of India (WTI). The village, located about 20 km from
Tura town, is an important Hoolock gibbon habitat.9 An area of 80 ha was set aside as a given
reserve by the village in 2007 and registered with the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council.

This information has been compiled by Saili S. Palande largely based on North Eastern
Biodiversity Research Cell, North Eastern Hill University, Strategy and Action Plan for Meghalaya
State. Prepared under National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Ministry of Environment
and Forests (Government of India, 2002). Other sources for specific information are given in
the text.

Endnotes
1
Forest Survey of India, State Forest Report of Meghalaya (FSI, 2003).
2
Advisory Panel on Decentralisation and Devolution, Empowerment and Strengthening of Panchayati Raj Institutions,
‘Empowering and strengthening of Panchayati Raj institutions/autonomous district councils/traditional tribal governing
institutions in north east India’ (National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, 2001).
3
In the past a site was cut and burnt for cultivation, cultivated for three years and left fallow for 15-20 years to
regenerate. This period of leaving land fallow has in some areas has been reduced to as little as 3-5 years.
4
Kalpavriksh and Technical and Policy Core Group (TPCG), Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report of the
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (Prepared by the NBSAP Technical and Policy Core Group, Delhi/Pune,
Kalpavriksh, 2005).
5
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani, Important Bird Areas of India: Priorities of Conservation (UK/Mumbai, IBCN: BNHS,
Bird Life International, 2004.
6
M.Z.Islam and A.R. Rahmani, Potential Ramsar Sites in India (UK/Mumbai, IBCN:BNHS and Birdlife International,
2006).
7
Source: E-mail correspondence on forest rights list-serv (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/forestrights) on 23 April
2007. For more details, contact dhrupadc@yahoo.co.in.
8
Contact: Nimesh Ved, Samrakshan Trust, Meghalaya Field Office, c/o Dorikson, Rangdokram, P.O. Baghmara,
District South Garo Hills - 794102. E-mail: nimesh.ved@gmail.com.
9
Contact: P.S. Easa, Wildlife Trust of India (WTI), A-220, New Friends Colony, New Delhi-110065, Tel: 011-
26326025/26. E-mail: easa@wti.org. See also http://wildlifetrustofindia.org
state chapter - meghalaya
 CCA/Megh/CS1/Khasi hills/Thaiang/Revival of sacred grove

Thaiang sacred groves, Khasi hills

Background
Untouched patches of forest forming pockets of rich biodiversity mark the landscape of Meghalaya.
These sacred forests are known as law iyngdoh, law kyngtang and law niam and have been
protected by the Khasi tribes of the Khasi Hills. The sacred groves are integrated into the lives of
the Khasis as a form of nature worship. The traditional Khasi religion is animist and to some extent
monotheistic, with a paramount ‘God the creator’ (u blei nongthew), wherein the gods represent
the natural forces of water, river, wind, etc. They worship trees, forests, groves and rivers as their
deities or the abodes of their deities. They believe that the gods will be offended if their domain is
disturbed and that ‘those who disturb their forests will die’. This age-old ideology has saved many
pristine forestlands from ‘falling under the axe’.
During British rule, Presbyterian missionaries began in 1841 to spread their work in the hills,
converting many people to Christianity. The decline in the form of nature worship, coupled with the
increase in demand for timber for both local as well as market forces from outside resulted in the
speedy felling of these sacred groves. The disappearance of these pristine sacred forests can also
be attributed to the overpowering demand for timber from outside the state as well as the decline
in number of Khasis who are strict followers of the Khasi religion.
After Independence, the Constitution of India made a provision (Schedule 6 areas)1 that an
elected body of tribes (Autonomous District Council) would take up the administration in their
respective districts except in the case of Reserve Forests, which were to be managed by the State.
However, the former rulers of the land and managers of the forests since the British Raj, who
did not follow the traditional system of conservation and the rules laid down by the government,
subsequently ravaged the forests, using them as a source for generating money. The depletion
can also be attributed to the lack of vision and long-term aim on the part of the District Council,
which caused maximum damage.

Towards community conservation

Close to the Assam border, in the Thaiang area (comprising seven villages) in Ri Bhoi district of
the Khasi Hills, a large and magnificent sacred grove was sold and cut down thirty years ago. The
people who were responsible for this were the village elders who had a critical role to play in the
management of these sacred groves.
The people of Thaiang believe that due to the destruction of the forest by their forefathers, ‘Good
luck has left the area.’ ‘Good luck’ or prosperity in these parts is represented by the tiger, who
is the spirit of the sacred grove and protector of villages. The absence of ‘good luck’ leads to the
suffering caused by the lack of availability of many forest produce such as medicinal plants, wood
for religious occasions, along with scarcity of water and an increased rate of soil erosion.
Therefore, in 1992, at a suggestion from Lyngdoh (priest), the new generation finally decided
to try and bring back the ‘good luck’ to their villages by reforesting the area of the former grove.
This initiative was led by a Khasi poet and folklorist, Desmond L. Kharmawphlang, with help from
a Swiss artists’ association called Bureau 64.
case studies - meghalaya

In April 1997, the people of Thaiang celebrated the beginning of reforestation of their sacred
groves with a ritual of Knia Ryngkew—the Ritual of the Tiger Spirit—which had not been performed
for almost thirty years. After erecting a group of monoliths for future commemoration of the
event, they entered the sacred grove led by dancers and drums. There was a celebration of the
spring dance ‘Shad Suk Mynsiem’ (Dance of the Happy Hearts), which was to be celebrated again
regularly from then on.
A month later, at the end of June, the actual reforestation was performed in the community area.
However, it is not known whether the species planted were indigenous or not.
In the winter of 1997-8, Desmond L. Kharmawphlang, along with some friends and a group of
intellectuals from Shillong, founded Dalamariang (Protect the Earth), an association to serve as
a coordinator for the Thaiang project. The Syiem (traditional head of the Khasi state) of Khyrim2
acts as Dalamariang’s president and the Lyngdoh of Nongkrem as the vice-president. In 1998, the
441
442 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Thaiang spring dance took place a second time since its restoration work. With logistic help from
Dalamariang and financial support from Bureau 64, 92 fishponds were dug.

Box 1
Sacred forests of Meghalaya: Biological and cultural diversity3
The Khasi Hills of Meghalaya are characterised by pockets of rich biodiversity that have been
protected by the Khasis and form the basis of nature worship practices in the area, manifested
in the trees, forests, groves and rivers. The Khasi people believe that those who disturb the
forest will die, and that sacred animals such as the tiger bring about prosperity, happiness
and well-being. These beliefs have resulted in the protection and continued regeneration of
considerable forest land in the region. In fact, the people of Thaiang believe that the destruction
of their forest by their forefathers has caused ‘good luck’ (i.e., the tiger) to leave, leading
directly to suffering due to a scarcity of medicinal plants, wood, water and fertile soils. In the
state of Meghalaya, 79 sacred groves have been recorded so far—15 in the Jaintia Hills, three
in Ri Bhoi, 32 in East Khasi Hills, 13 in West Khasi Hills, eight in East Garo Hills, and eight in
West Garo Hills. In size these groves range from 0.01 ha in Jaintia Hills to Maw Kyrngah in East
Khasi Hills at 1200 ha. At least 40 of these range from 50-400 ha. Mawphlang sacred grove at
75 hectares is probably the best known of all of these because of its proximity to Shillong, the
state capital. Many of these sacred groves have remained untouched since times immemorial
because of the fear of the deities associated with them. About 1 per cent of these sacred groves
remain completely undisturbed in their pristine form even today. 42 per cent are dense forests
with a canopy cover of 100 per cent to 40 per cent, 26 per cent are under sparse forest cover
(40 per cent to 10 per cent), and 30 per cent are open forests (less than 10 per cent).

Given the fast-changing social trends, it appears unlikely that religious belief will be able to
protect sacred groves for long. If these repositories of flora and fauna are to be preserved, it is
important to take some of the following steps:
• Legal backing, such that it is with the consent and acceptance of the local people.
• Strengthening the local management systems through appropriate financial or other intervention,
aiming at improving the biomass requirements of the local people.
• Helping in the better management of the other village commons to meet local needs.
• Reviving the old custom of supply forests and sacred forests by treating buffer zones sacred
groves as supply forests.
• Instituting awards for the best-managed and protected sacred groves.

Conclusion
Plantations in Thaiang sacred grove have reportedly been very successful. This example brings
out the close relation between wildlife and local people in Meghalaya, with people believing in the
tiger as their guardian spirit, and where the tiger is believed to bring prosperity, happiness and
well being.

This case study was contributed by Ritwick Dutta in 2001. He is currently a lawyer at the
Supreme Court.

For more information contact:

Ritwick Dutta
Chamber 69, Lawyers Chambers,
Supreme Court of India,
Bhagwan Das Road,
New Delhi. Ph: 011-9810044660 Email: ritwickdutta@gmail.com

Endnotes
1
Wherein Autonomous District Councils are given the sole authority of managing their own natural resources, except
in the case of reserved forests, which are to be managed by the state government.
2
Khyrim was a traditional Khasi state headed by the Syiem. Presently, its traditional status no longer exists, although
many of the traditional practices continue.
3
Source: B.K. Tiwari, S.K. Barik and R.S. Tripathi, Sacred Forests of Meghalaya: Biological and Cultural Diversity
(Shillong, Regional Centre, National Afforestation and Eco-Development Board, North-Eastern Hill University,
1999).
Nagaland
Nagaland: A quiet revolution
Neema Pathak and Ashish Kothari

In 1983, in a Chakhesang tribal settlement called Lozaphuhu, the local student’s union (LSU),
resolved to conserve a 500 ha (5 sq km) patch of forest above the village. The motivation was to
protect key sources of water. In 1990, the LSU declared another patch of forest below the main
village, between the settlement and paddy fields, as a wildlife reserve, with a total ban on hunting
and other resource use (see Case Studies).
In 1988, the Village Council of Khonoma village, Kohima district, declared 2000 ha (20 sq km)
of forest and grassland area as the Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary (see
Case Studies). Rules were formulated to strictly ban hunting of all species within the entire area of
the village, to stop resource uses in the core area of the sanctuary, and to allow only a few benign
uses in the buffer area.
Villagers in Sendenyu village (also in Kohima district) estimate the area they are protecting to be
around 1000 ha (10 sq km) (see Case Studies). Tuophema village (in the same district) is protecting
1600 ha, linked to an ecotourism initiative, and in 1995, residents of Chishlimi, Zunheboto district,
banned hunting in a designated forest area (see Case Studies). They also stopped the use of
explosives to catch fish in the Tizu river, in order to help fish populations recover. In the same
district, the Ghosu Bird Reserve in Gikhiye (Gukhui) was one of the first community protected
areas to be declared. Gikhiye and five neighbouring villages are also regulating fishing in their
river, by banning use of explosives, chemicals and electricity. Similar efforts at controlling fishing
have been made by many villages in the state.
In 2004, the Chakhesang Public Organisation (CPO) comprising 80 villages in Phek district,
resolved to stop indiscriminate forest fires and to ban hunting seasonally in their respective areas.
Prior to this, 23 Chakhesang tribal villages had declared part of their land as strictly protected for
wildlife.
These are but a few examples of a quiet and remarkable revolution taking place in this usually
forgotten corner of India—Nagaland. This is a state in which several species of hornbills, primates,
cats and other wild animals have been driven to extinction due to habitat destruction, indiscriminate
hunting and other factors. In this context, therefore, what the examples above indicate is nothing
short of a revolution. For village after village to declare no-hunting and no-deforestation zones,
and for the local people to show that they can indeed sustain nature against all odds, is no mean
feat.

1. An introduction
Nagaland became the 16th Indian state in 1963. Situated between the latitudes 25°6’ and 27°4’N
and longitudes 93°20’ and 95°15’E, the total area of the state is 16,527 sq km. The state shares its
borders with the states of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur and with Myanmar. The forest cover
of Nagaland, as per 2003 satellite data, is 13,609
sq km, about 82 per cent of the total geographical
area. A little less than half of this is moderate to
highly dense forest, whereas the rest is open or
state chapter - nagaland

degraded forest.1 Unlike in the rest of India, about

88 per cent of forests in Nagaland actually belong to
communities or individuals, and not the government.
Sporadic research on some flora species in some
areas indicates a very high biological diversity,
including a large number of endemic species.2
Nagaland’s population in 2001 was 1.99 million,
with over 89 per cent being scheduled tribes.
Christianity dominates in the state, with almost 90
per cent of the people being of this faith, about 8
A diversity of fruits and vegetables being sold in per cent Hindu, and very small minorities belonging
a market near Dimapur Photo: Ashish Kothari to other religions.3 The predominant occupation is
445
446 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

agriculture, with over 85 per cent of the population directly dependent on it.4
Till the 19th century, the Nagas are believed to have lived a life centered around hunting,
gathering and subsistence agriculture. They were never under outside rule prior to the British. The
British managed to occupy Nagaland in the late 19th century. Being involved in a struggle for a
separate nation for over half a century, Nagaland has had a troubled history. However, Naga groups
are currently negotiating a peace treaty with the Indian government. There are 16 major tribes
and a number of sub-tribes in Nagaland, each culturally distinct from the other. Nagas have been
famous for their fearless and brave warriors, unique agricultural abilities, love of wild meat and
head-hunting practices in the past. Traditionally, use of forests had certain taboos and restrictions,
e.g., no resource extraction was allowed from the taboo forests, believed to be inhabited by evil
spirits. Also during certain periods in a year, consumption of meat and salt and hunting was not
allowed. Several local environmentalists feel that with the advent of Christianity, many of these
belief systems broke down. The ‘insurgency’ or underground resistance movement over the last
few decades and the occupation by the Indian army are also believed to have led to a major influx
of firearms, transforming low-level traditional hunting into a much more destructive practice.

Box 1
Local administration and social organisation
Social organisation in Naga society has traditionally been very strong. Social ties were in the
past further strengthened by traditions such as the morungs.5 Each tribe in the state had its own
traditional systems of governance. In some villages, decisions were left to the great warriors.
In others, hereditary village heads, or male-dominated village assemblies were the decision
makers.6 Today, the traditional heads continue to be an important part of the decision-making
processes in the village. Formally, the 1225 villages in Nagaland are administered by village
councils (VCs) and village development boards (VDBs). VCs are constituted under the Nagaland
Village and Area Council Act, 1978. This act gives powers to the Village Councils to formulate
village development schemes, to supervise proper maintenance of water supply, roads, forests,
education and other welfare activities. Village councils under this act amalgamate the traditional
systems of decision-making as the traditional village heads, and the gaon buras7 (village elders)
are the permanent members of the VC. The VC members are chosen by villagers in accordance
with the customary practices and usages, and approved by the State Government. VDBs are
constituted by the VCs to formulate schemes and programmes of action for developmental work
in the village. All permanent residents of the village are the members of the VDB general body.
An important provision in the Nagaland legislation is that the customary law has precedence
in settlement of disputes (Article 371A of the Indian Constitution). Villages also have informal
village-level organisations such as youth clubs, student unions, wildlife protection committees,
etc. Each village may have all or some of these institutions. In addition to these village-level
informal organisations, most tribes are structured at inter-village level as well. A group of
villages occupied by the same tribe together forms a district-level organisation—for example,
Chakhesang Public Organisation, which includes all 80 Chakhesang villages in Phek District, or
Western Angami Public Organisation, Southern Angami Public Organisation and so on. All tribal
organisations together form the Naga Hoho, which meets once a year. The Nagaland Village
and Area Council Act also provides for area councils, which are expected to be federations of
the village councils.

2. The present ecological context

There is very little in Nagaland that has not been affected by changes brought about during
and after the British occupation. Rampant and unregulated hunting has seriously depleted wildlife
populations. Many of the hills that were blanketed by thick forests have been deforested. The
treasured hornbill feathers and beaks that wealthy people wore as head-gear have now become
even more precious because of their unavailability. Fake feathers made of white paper with a band
of black paint across the top are used when the real thing cannot be obtained.
Till 1996, timber extraction was a major source of income for many villages. According to some
local people, this led to a rapid degradation of the virgin forests of Nagaland, particularly in
privately owned forests. Under the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, four protected areas have been
declared: Fakim Wildlife Sanctuary, Intangki National Park, Rangapahar Wildlife Sanctuary and
Puliebadze Wildlife Sanctuary. These sanctuaries together cover only about 2.6 per cent of the
total geographical area of the state. Considering that most land is under community control,
 Nagaland 447

implementation of this act does not seem to be very effective. In such a scenario the hope for
the struggling wildlife population in the state would be bleak but for the new wave of people’s
efforts.

3. A wide range of conservation efforts

Different villages have adopted different systems for
conservation. Their community conserved areas (CCAs) range
from completely inviolate zones to multiple-use zones.

3.1 Forest reserves

Forest reserves are declared for various reasons: to preserve
water sources of the village, to obtain a sustained supply of
biological resources, or as buffer zones for a more strictly
protected area. Hunting is allowed in some cases, not in
others.

3.2 Wildlife reserves

In Phek, Zunheboto, Kohima and other districts it is common
to come across signboards stating that a certain patch of
forest is a wildlife reserve. Wildlife reserves are completely
inviolate zones where all kinds of hunting, fishing and biomass
collection is strictly prohibited. Most wildlife reserves can be Board indicating village resolution
easily distinguished from the other forests by their appearance, regulating use of Doyang river
Photo: Ashish Kothari
as well as the sounds and signs of birds and other animals.

3.3 Wildlife reserves as core areas with forest reserves as buffers

One of the best-known examples of this kind of effort is Khonoma village. The village declared
a 20 sq km area as a Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary in 1998, where absolutely no
hunting or resource use is allowed. The sanctuary is surrounded by a clan forest, which is much
larger in area and is considered as a buffer to the sanctuary. No hunting and extraction except
wild fruits and vegetables and one truckload of firewood per family per year is permitted from this
zone.

3.4 Wetland reserves

In some villages such as Gikhiye (Gukhui), Lozaphuhu and Chishlimi, villagers on their own, or
with other neighbouring villages, have formulated well-defined rules and regulations for fishing in
wetlands such as river stretches. These rules restrict use of explosives, chemicals and electricity
for fishing.

3.5 Seasonal ban on hunting

Seasonal hunting bans, particularly during the breeding season, is another practice adopted in
many districts. February to May is the most active hunting season, as agricultural responsibilities
are few. Villagers in favour of a seasonal hunting ban feel that such bans are more effective to start
with, as a complete ban would be difficult to adhere to and would antagonise people. Some villages
such as Gikhiye (Gukhui) have selectively banned certain kinds of hunting tools such as air guns,
which are considered to be more harmful when used irresponsibly.

3.6 Complete ban on hunting

state chapter - nagaland

Khonoma is probably the only known example in Nagaland where hunting is banned in the entire
village through the year. There are occasional incidents when villagers go to other areas and hunt,
but at the same time there is a growing realization that it is unfair to do so. However, one problem
is that with a reported increase in the population of wild pigs, incidents of crop damage have also
increased. In 2005, therefore, hunting of wild pigs that entered agricultural fields was re-opened
in Khonoma village (see Case Studies)
448 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Box 2
Threatened species protected in Nagaland’s CCAs
Nagaland’s community conserved areas may be helping to protect several threatened and
endemic species. For instance:
• The stretch of forest between Pfutsero and Chizami villages in Phek District has been identified
as one of the Important Bird Areas (IBAs)8 in Nagaland due to the presence of endemic
species, including birds like Blyth’s tragopan, grey sibia, beautiful sibia, white-naped yuhina;
and mammals like serow and spotted linsang.
• The community protected forests in Phek district may have some of India’s last populations of
the grey peacock pheasant, and of Mrs. Hume’s pheasant.
• The Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary is also among the IBAs for being
home to Blyth’s tragopan, grey sibia, white-naped yuhina, dark-rumped swift, clouded leopard,
slow loris and Hoolock gibbon, among other species.
• Mount Zanibu, part of the forests being protected by Runguzu and other villages in Phek
District, is another IBA in Nagaland, and harbours Blyth’s tragopan, rufous-necked hornbill,
Mrs. Hume’s pheasant, and Austen’s barwing. Zanibu still harbours a population of great pied
hornbill, which has nearly disappeared in other parts of Nagaland.9
Other species reported by the villagers in their CCAs include tiger, leopard, wild dog, stump-
tailed macaque, and Asiatic black bear. Though less focused upon, these reserves also contain
significant population of reptiles, amphibians, fish, and invertebrate and floral diversity. The
Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary, for instance, contains the endemic
Dzuku lily and as many as 25 species of amphibians.10 Urgent flora and fauna studies are
needed to establish the full range of biodiversity in these CCAs.

4. Institutions and systems for CCA management

In most villages, decisions related to conservation of wildlife are taken after considerable discussion.
Wildlife reserves or other measures are taken only after the approval from village elders and the
village council (VC). For the day-to-day management, however, different villages adopt different
measures. In some villages the management responsibilities are undertaken by existing groups such
as the youth groups, while in others special committees are constituted for management of wildlife
reserves. In the case of multiple villages, a committee is constituted, usually comprising the VC
chairpersons of relevant villages. Whatever the institution for decision-making and management,
in most villages the youth groups are actively involved in implementation of rules and collection
of fines. The close-knit social fabric in villages ensures that rules are more or less adhered to
by all. Members of youth organizations are certain that once a signboard declaring an area as
protected has been put up by a village, even neighbouring villages would respect it (though this
is not always the case). Rules and regulations imposed vary from being intricately formulated and
written down, to general announcements by the VC with the assumption that everyone will abide
by them. Violations are few but do take place. For violations, communities have worked out their
own penal systems. For example, in 70 ha of protected forests of Kikruma, hunting and burning
are strictly banned. A fine of Rs 1000-10000 is levied for felling trees, depending on the tree
species. Similarly Rs 5,000 is the fined amount for extraction of orchids and for hunting birds. The
VC is responsible to impose and recover the fines. If individuals do not pay, the Chakhesang Public
Organisation (CPO) deducts the due amount from the funds allocated by the Deputy Commissioner
for the village. In Sendenyu, the fines vary depending upon the species hunted. For instance, the
fine for hunting a sambar is highest (Rs 5,000) as the sambar population is rapidly decreasing. In
Chishilimi village, a major threat was faced from the neighbouring villages. The village therefore
decided to confiscate and sell weapons used for hunting. 50 per cent of this money is given to
the informer and the rest goes to the VC. This system of allocating fine money to the VC has
been adopted by a number of villages. In some villages, however, the amount is shared between
the VC, youth groups, women’s groups and other groups involved with conservation efforts. In
different places these community efforts have achieved different degrees of success. In some
areas seasonal hunting is strictly adhered to, while in others it is not very effective. In some areas,
fires are strictly controlled, while in others the ban is not very effective. Whatever the degree of
success, these community initiatives face a number of challenges. There is little or no outside
support, and little recognition for these initiatives, within or outside the state. Local community
capacity to handle external or internal threats, or to conduct ecological and social studies, is limited.
 Nagaland 449

Some communities need basic resources, which are often not available, for employing watchmen
or putting up signboards. Women still do not play a significant role in discussions, decisions or
implementation of the rules and regulations (except to some extent behind the scenes). Also,
increasingly the younger generation may want clearer links between the forests being conserved
and their own livelihoods. It is in this scenario that the rest of the people in Nagaland, and the
rest of the country, need to realize the critically important initiatives being taken up by these Naga
communities. They need to extend necessary support and backing, in ways that are sensitive to
the cultural and ecological contexts, the worldview and the desires of the communities.

5. The way forward

Communities in Nagaland have initiated a unique process that needs to be recognised and
encouraged. Many of these communities are looking for some positive external inputs and support.
Given that they have paved a way for drafting a unique conservation policy for the state, it would
be crucial at this stage to take note of these initiatives and move ahead in the directions mentioned
above. A lack of interest and enthusiasm from the government, academic and non-government
agencies could lead to discouragement and disappointment among the local people. In many of
these initiatives, youth are taking a keen interest in conservation activities. The youth are also
faced with problems of unemployment and unrealistic aspirations. In this scenario, facilitating and
guiding them to take a greater interest in conservation, and linking this in some way to livelihood
options, can build a strong mass-based conservation lobby in Nagaland. The following steps, at the
very least, are needed .11
• A preliminary documentation of how many CCAs exist in the state and the kind of management
systems and prescriptions that they follow. A mapping exercise would give an idea about their
connectivity to other habitats of ecological importance.
• Developing a comprehensive biodiversity (including wildlife) conservation policy for the state.
This policy should be developed with full participation of the representatives of CCAs, NGOs and
individuals who are playing a key role.
• Conducting a needs assessment to understand what kind of support will strengthen a particular
initiative without co-opting or destroying the existing systems.
• Conducting an assessment of whether these initiatives need legal backing, and, if so, what would
be the most appropriate legal regime.
• Carrying out studies of the biodiversity status of CCAs to explore what species are
found in the areas being protected by the communities.
• Carrying out studies of the positive and negative impacts (ecological and social) of
community initiatives.
• Creating Regional/District Federations and institutions which would act as a support
base for these initiatives as well as help with long-term monitoring.
• Building capacity to handle issues related to biodiversity conservation at the village,
district and state level. This would mean appropriate training programmes for local
youth, leaders and others, with help from academic institutions and NGOs and the
government; conversely, it would also mean exposure trips for such institutions and
NGOs and government officials, to learn from the villagers.
• Developing links between these conservation initiatives and livelihoods by exploring
sustainable jhum cultivation, forest-based enterprises, community-based ecologically
state chapter - nagaland

sensitive tourism, and so on.

With inputs from Nagaland Empowerment of People through Economic

Development (NEPED) team, Kohima; Bibhab Talukdar and Firoz Ahmed
(Aranyak, Guwahati); Joy Dasgupta (ICIMOD, Kathmandu); Anwaruddin
Choudhary (Administrative Officer, Assam).
450 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Endnotes
1
Forest Survey of India, State of Forest Report 2003 (available at www.fsiorg.net/fsi2003/states/index.asp?state
code=20).
2
O.P. Singh and B.K. Tiwari State Level Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan of Nagaland. In TPGC and Kalpavriksh,
Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report of the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Prepared by the
NBSAP Technical and Policy Core Group. (Pune, Kalpavriksh 2005).
3
www.censusindia.net/t_00_005.html and www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Religiondata_2001.xls
4
www.nagaland.nic.in/profile
5
Morungs were traditional dormitories where young men were taught the virtues, culture and traditions of the tribe
and clan by village elders.
6
S. Hazarika, Strangers of the Mist: Tales of War & Peace from India’s Northeast (Penguin Books, Delhi, 1994).
7
To formalise the local governance somewhat and bring about some uniformity, the British introduced the system of
gaon buras for local administration, where each clan and hamlet would select a respectable elder to represent them
in village decision-making.
8
IBAs are sites of international importance for the conservation of birds and their habitats. IBAs are among the
world’s key sites for biodiversity conservation and the IBA concept developed by the Birdlife International Partnership
facilitates their identification nationally, using data gathered locally following globally agreed and standardised criteria.
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani. Important Bird Areas in India: Priority sites for conservation (Indian Bird Conservation
Network: Bombay Natural History Society and BirdLife International (UK), 2004).
9
Islam and Rahmani. Important Bird Areas in India: Priority sites for conservation (as above).
10
Firoz Ahmed, Aranyak, personal communication, 2005.
11
Some of these are taken from the Final Statement of a State-level Workshop on Communities and Biodiversity,
organised at Kohima from 24-27 October 2005, by NEPED, Kalpavriksh and the Nagaland Forest Department.
 CCA/Nag/CS1/Kohima/Khonoma/Forest and species protection

Khonoma village, Kohima

Background

Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary

Photo: Ashish Kothari Inset: Blyth’s tragopan Photo: Jean Howman/WPA

Khonoma village is located about 20 km from the state capital, Kohima. The village, referred
to as Khwunoria (named after the Angami term for a local plant, Glouthera fragrantisima),
is estimated to be around 700 years old and is spread over an area of 123sq.km. The total
population of the village is about 3000, settled in 600 households. Khonoma is famous for its
forests and a unique form of agriculture, including some of the oldest terraced cultivation in the
region. The terrain of the village is hilly, ranging from gentle slopes to steep and rugged hillsides.
The hills are covered with lush forestland, rich in various species of flora and fauna. The state
bird, Blyth’s tragopan, a pheasant now nationally endangered, is reprtedly found here.
Over a hundred years ago, advancing British troops found themselves facing a determined warrior
tribe in the highlands of Nagaland. The Angami men of Khonoma, famed for their martial prowess
and strategic skills, fought a resolute battle to safeguard their territory, inflicting heavy casualties on
the foreign soldiers. The village is recorded to have resisted British rule in the region from 1830s to
1880. Finally a truce between the two stopped further bloodshed, but meanwhile Khonoma village
had etched its name into the history of Indian resistance to the colonial invasion. Christianity was
introduced in the village in 1890, and today most of the villagers are of this faith.
Preliminary ecological studies done so far record the use of about 250 plant species, including
over 70 for medicinal purposes, 84 kinds of wild fruits, 116 kinds of wild vegetables, nine varieties
of mushrooms, and five kinds of natural dyes from the surrounding forests in the village. Local
people have recorded about 204 species of trees, nearly 45 varieties of orchids, 11 varieties of
case
case studies

cane, and 19 varieties of bamboo. Villagers also record 25 types of snakes, six kinds of lizards, 11
kinds of amphibians and 196 kinds of birds (of which English names for 87 have been identified,
including the grey-billed or Blyth’s tragopan, a threatened bird mentioned in the red data book of
studies -- nagaland

IUCN). 72 kinds of wild animals have also been reported by the local people; however English and
scientific names for all have not been recorded yet. These include tiger, leopard, serow, sloth bear,
Asiatic black bear and common otter.1
Today, Khonoma is witnessing another historic struggle. In an incident reminiscent of the British
nagaland

invasion, in the mid-1990s the villagers had to physically resist timber merchants who came with
several dozen elephants to carry out logging, unfortunately aided by some insiders. Over the last
decade Khonoma, inhabited by the Angamis, one of Nagaland’s tribes, has made giant strides
in establishing or strengthening systems of natural resource management, conflict resolution,
451
452 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

village administration and appropriate development, all coupled with a resolute will to conserve
biodiversity and wildlife. All this is embedded in the traditional ethos of the village, without fighting
shy of experimenting with new technologies and thoughts from outside. The results are impressive
enough to warrant yet another key historic place for this village, this time in the annals of India’s
environmental movement.

Towards community conservation

Wildlife hunting is a way of life with the Naga tribes, and a large number of birds and animals
are killed every year, including the endangered tragopans. In 1993, 300 Tragopans were reported
to be killed for their meat in the village. This magnitude of killing concerned the more ecologically
sensitive people of the village and they launched a crusade against hunting. These included some
villagers and some who belonged to the village but now resided and were employed outside.
In 1998, the Khonoma village council declared its intention to notify about 2000 ha (20 sq km)
as the Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary (KNCTS). This was motivated by
some of the village elders, notably Tsilie Sakhrie, who had in the 1980s been a contractor dealing
with the Forest Department. During this time he had been having discussions with forest officer
T. Angami, who motivated him to consider dedicating a part of the village forests to wildlife
conservation. In the 1980s, Tsilie proposed that the village do something to this effect, but could
not achieve a consensus. In 1995, he became a member of the village council. Concerned by
the high number of birds being killed every year, Tsilie again broached the subject. A number of
villagers were opposed to the idea, since hunting was so much a part of their culture. However, over
the next three years, through extensive discussions in the village, the majority were convinced.
The sanctuary’s foundation stone was laid in December 1998; it was also decided to ban hunting
in the entire village, not only the sanctuary area.
Not content with simple declaration of the sanctuary, the village set up a KNCTS Trust, with a
formal set of rules and regulations. Office bearers were chosen from amongst the villagers; Tsilie
was chosen the chief managing director. Rules were laid down for the management of the sanctuary,
including penalties for violations, ranging from Rs 300-3000, depending on the seriousness of the
violation. The village youth were requested to carry out monitoring and to levy fines, which they
could then use for their own village-based activities. Villagers also selected some youth members
to be the wardens for the sanctuary, to periodically check on the sanctuary. As the concept of a
sanctuary was new to the villagers, they decided to seek help from the government, NGOs and other
institutions in order to seek technical and academic support for protecting their sanctuary.
NGOs such as the Centre for Environment Education (CEE), North-east Regional Cell, assisted
in spreading awareness about the conservation of tragopans. A six-member team of KNCTS was
given an orientation about the sanctuary. A number of environmental awareness expeditions were
organised for village members. The importance of having a village map, land records, and a survey
of flora and fauna were explained to the villagers. Community members visited Chakrashila Wildlife
Sanctuary2 in Assam to share experiences with other similar efforts and visited Kaziranga National
Park to understand the issues related to protected area management. NGOs like EQUATIONS
(based in Bangalore) have helped the local Khonoma Tourism Development Board to carry out an
Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) of tourism, in case the village goes in for a much larger
visitor influx. Another NGO, Aranyak (based in Guwahati), has helped the villagers conduct a
survey of fauna and flora in KNCTS.
Conservation is only one of the elements of social empowerment at Khonoma. Visitors to the
village are confronted with a bewildering number of activities and processes that its residents seem
to be engaged in. Some of these are new, some age-old. Khonoma may well be the only village in
India that has a global citizenry with an active self-identity; every year, 1 September is celebrated
as the village’s ‘birthday’, with Khonomaians from far and wide coming to the village to celebrate,
or carrying out celebrations wherever they may be. There are even Khonoma student unions in
Kolkata, Mumbai and Delhi!
Given its historic past, Khonoma also plays host to many tourists; it is on the tourist circuit of
those who visit Kohima. Some years ago the Government of India recognised the potential of
the village to organise itself, and granted it a substantial Green Village fund through the Tourism
Department of the state government. The money is being used to provide basic civic amenities
and hygiene measures, reinforce community infrastructure, and prepare the village to receive and
show visitors its past and present.
Khonoma is also well-known in agricultural circles for its sophisticated cultivation techniques.
In shifting cultivation, farmers use Nepal alder (Alnus nepalensis) trees interspersed with the
crops. These trees return nitrogen to the soil, thereby helping the land to rapidly regain fertility
when farmers abandon it to move on to the next plot. The village overlooks a wide valley that
 Nagaland 453

has been converted into terraced fields, made with such

precision that their productivity has apparently remained
stable over centuries. According to the villagers, Khonoma
is also home to over sixty varieties of rice, and a diversity
of millets, maize, Job’s tears, citrus fruits and other crops
(grown without using chemical pesticides or fertilizers). All
this has made the village a model for emulation in many
other parts of Nagaland through the efforts of the unique
inter-departmental Nagaland Empowerment of People
through Economic Development (NEPED) programme. This
is especially useful where shifting cultivation has become
unsustainable due to shorter cycles of leaving the land fallow
after cultivation.
Amongst the factors that makes all this tick is the strong
and clear ownership of land and natural resources within the
village boundaries. Such ownership provides a strong stake
in working out sustainable modes of land management. But
this would not be enough in itself (for such ownership could
also result in individuals destroying their lands), were it not
coupled with very strong social and political organisations.
The village is divided into three hamlets (khels), each with Angami youth in traditional costume
several clans, each clan comprised of several families. The Photo: Ashish Kothari
clan is itself a decision-making unit, and selects members
to represent itself in larger village-level bodies. These include the village council (which is overall
responsible for all affairs), the Village Development Board (recipients of government funds for
developmental purposes) and the ruffono, a recent innovation to bring all village institutions under
a common umbrella. Traditional institutions such as decision-making by the gaon buras (village
elders) have been integrated into the village council’s decision-making. The youth are part of
either a student union or a youth association; the women are members of the Khonoma Women’s
Organisation. In addition, all villagers are part of an ‘age group’. Such groups are formed by boys
and girls in the age group 12-15, and carry out social activities like construction of rest-houses and
village paths, and formation of singing and dancing groups. The bond lasts a lifetime; members
stick together till they are into their 60s and 70s!
Citizens of the village who move out in search of employment always remain connected to the
village in some form and contribute to its well-being whenever possible.

Impacts of the initiative

The area included in the Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary (KNCTS) is of
outstanding value from a biodiversity, water security and aesthetic point of view. On the map it
is about 20 sq km, but if the contours are accounted for, the area may be 70 sq km, comprising
exquisite broad-leaved forests and dwarf bamboo grasslands. It is part of the Dzuku valley, which,
though not many people would know this, was immortalised by Vikram Seth in his poem ‘The
Elephant and the Tragopan’. The poem is about how the wild animals of the valley try to stop
a proposed dam that would drown out their valley, reflecting an actual movement by NGOs in
Nagaland against such a proposal in the 1990s. The idea of the dam has been replaced by a
pipeline proposal, to take water from here to Kohima, a project that would hopefully have little
ecological impact.
Dzuku is home to a healthy population of the severely endangered state bird, the Blyth’s tragopan
(a pheasant). For this and other reasons, the Bombay Natural History Society considers it one
of India’s Important Bird Areas. Dzuku and surrounding forests also contain considerable other
case studies - nagaland

wildlife, including Asiatic black bear. There are over 40 species of orchids, apart from hundreds of
other plant species, the endemic Dzuku lily, serow, sambar, leopard, and so on. Till recently, all
these species had dwindled alarmingly due to hunting and habitat pressures. Villagers assert that
they are now again increasing due to their conservation efforts; in fact crop damage by wild pigs
has become a menace! The hunting ban seems to be highly effective; less than 10 violations have
been reported in the last few years.
Tsilie and others are now proposing an extension of the sanctuary to neighbouring forests that
are currently seen as a ‘buffer zone’. Currently no hunting or extraction of timber is allowed in the
buffer. If accepted by the council, the area (on map) would increase to over 3000 hectares (30 sq
km), which on the ground would translate to over 10,000 hectares (100 sq km). And Tsilie in his
capacity as the president of the Western Angami Public Organisation (an institution that contains
the entire western Angami tribal population) is already discussing with the Southern Angami Public
454 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Organisation to declare their areas also protected. Work could also be done to convince Naga tribes
in adjoining Manipur, since the Khonoma citizens have relations extending into those villages.
If successful, the entire Dzuku and Japfu area could be declared a community protected area,
extending to perhaps several hundred square kilometres.
There are, of course, blemishes aplenty. Women obviously do command a great deal of respect,
and reportedly are very influential at the household level, or through their own committee, but
they do not occupy formal positions in most of the decisive institutions such as the village council.
Although villagers have stopped hunting in their own village, they still occasionally hunt outside,
though apparently this too is on the decline. The capacity to handle tourists seems rather limited,
and there is a worry that a large-scale influx could be counter-productive: hence the importance
of the tourism EIA mentioned above. Ironically, the ban on hunting has created a problem of crop
damage by wild pigs and other wildlife, for which the village is contemplating selective lifting of
the ban, but residents are worried about whether this may have other negative consequences.
An increasing tendency to plant cash crops in the jhum (shifting cultivation) and terraced fields is
reportedly leading to loss of agricultural biodiversity. Documentation of the area’s biodiversity is
rather minimal, a start having only recently been made by the biologist Firoz Ahmed of Aranyak,
in association with some of the village youth. Marvelling at the level of traditional knowledge, Firoz
reports that of the 20 species of frogs and toads he found in Khonoma, 14 were already reported
by villagers!

Conclusions
Khonoma’s conservation initiative is all the more noteworthy if one looks at the enormous decline
of wildlife across Nagaland in the last few decades. Hunting has been rampant, according to one
resident perhaps fueled by the jump in firearms availability since a truce was declared between
the Nagas and the Indian army in 1997. The tribes here eat virtually everything that moves, and
though this may not have earlier damaged wildlife populations due to limited hunting technologies,
it has of late assumed severely destructive proportions. Khonoma’s effort assumes even greater
significance because it is only one of dozens of similar initiatives across Nagaland. Many settlements
in Phek and Kohima districts have displayed notice boards warning would-be hunters of severe
penalties, declaring community forest reserves with stringent restrictions on resource use, and so
on. Slowly but surely, wild animals are making a comeback, a phenomenon that even a decade
back seemed virtually impossible (see other case studies on Nagaland in this volume for details).

This case study has been compiled by Neema Pathak, based on information sent by Tsilie
Sakhrie, a social worker from Khonoma village; information collected during a field trip to
Khonoma village by Ashish Kothari, Neema Pathak and Shantha Bhushan of Kalpavriksh in
February 2005; A. Kothari, ‘The Khonoma Magic: A Nagaland Village Leads the Way’ Hindu
Survey of Environment 2005; and Environment Impact Assessment Report, Khonoma Tourism
Development Board, November 2004.

For more details contact:

Tsilie Sakhri and Mhiesizokho Zinyu
Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary
M. Zinyu, c/o T.U. Building, Opposite NST Complex, Kohima – 797001
Tel: 0370-2290256 (R) 0370-2100204

Charles Chasie
Centre for Democracy and Tribal Studies and Khonoma Tourism Board
Kohima, Nagaland
Email: esnindia@rediffmail.com
Phone: 0370-2290453/2290455

Endnotes
1
Environmental Society Of Nagaland, ‘Birds Of Nagaland’ (unpublished, 2002); M.F. Ahmed, ‘Biodiversity of Khonoma
Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary, Nagaland’, in Aranyak and KNCTS, Environment Impact Assessment
Report with reference to Eco-development, Natural Reseource management and Social Capital for the village
community of Khonoma, Nagaland (Khonoma Tourism Development Board, 2004).
2
A wildlife sanctuary in Assam, declared for conservation of the golden langur (Presbytis geei) at the behest of the
local people.
 CCA/Nag/CS2/Kohima/Sendenyu/Forest protection

Sendenyu village, Kohima

Background
Sendenyu village is located about 50 km from Kohima in Kohima district. The total population of
the village is 2507 as per the 2001 census. The total area of the village is 80sq.km. About 70 per
cent of the inhabitants are farmers by occupation. Most of the village land is privately owned. The
land use in the area includes shifting cultivation, settled cultivation, and privately owned forest
patches for biomass to be used for homesteads and commercially. Older members of the village
recount the presence of species such as Hoolock gibbons (Hylobates hoolock) and great hornbills
(Buceros bicornis), which are no longer found in the village.

Towards community conservation

The wildlife reserve in Sendenyu village, about 1 km down the hill, was formed as a result of
discussions initiated in the village council (VC) by some village members who had studied outside
the state and are currently serving as government officials. These members were good hunters
themselves, but decreasing wildlife population became a grave concern for them. The village
elders immediately understood their concern, as they had themselves witnessed a very sudden
decrease in wildlife populations within their lifetimes. The discussions, therefore, soon resulted
in the creation of about 10 sq km of wildlife reserve. The objective was to conserve and protect
the rich wildlife heritage of the village and to maintain ecological balance as also to check local
extinction of wild animals. The VC selected the land for the reserve based on its low productivity,
high gradient and rocky geology. The land belonged to the individual owners and was used for
timber and firewood collection. The owners originally objected to the plan but were persuaded by
the VC to donate the land for the larger cause. In return, the owners received LPG connections from
the forest department under Forest Development Authority (FDA)1 funds. Similar other benefits
for the landowners are being considered by the VC. Subsequently, the VC has passed a Sendenyu
Village Council Wild Life Conservation Act, 2001 (see Annexure 1). The declaration of ‘Sendenyu
Village Wildlife Protected Area’ was announced in a written resolution on 1 January 2001, along
with a map specifying the boundaries of the protected area (PA). The Act specifies that the PA
will be managed by a committee consisting of one chairman and one secretary, with gaon buras
(village elders) and presidents of the Youth Organisation, Sendenyu VC and New Sendenyu VC
as the ex-officio members of the committee. The committee also has some advisers. The Act is
subject to make amendments from time to time with the approval of the maximum representation
of Sendenyu general public.
Although the elders talk about a much thicker forest and an extensive diversity of animals in the
past, the village still harbours some populations of barking deer, Asiatic black bear, sambar, wild
boar and many species of birds. Villagers have taken up plantation of cherry trees to attract birds,
and have fenced off a part of the area to prevent grazing. In addition, the villagers contributed to
pay compensation to the church to move out their cattle camp from the wildlife sanctuary. Realising
that animals cannot be protected in
small islands, the village brought in an
amendment in January 2005 to also
declare the forests surrounding the
hunting reserve (owned by individual
case studies - nagaland

families) as a no hunting-zone,
although all other uses are allowed
here. The period between February
and the end of monsoons has been
declared a ‘no hunting’ period in the
entire village. Additionally, hunting
of sambar is banned throughout the
year within the boundaries of the
village. Hunting in prohibited areas
and seasons attracts heavy penalties.
The fines vary depending upon the
Photo: Ashish Kothari species hunted. For example, the fine
455
456 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

for hunting a sambar is highest (Rs 5000), as the sambar population is rapidly decreasing in the
village. The village had a bounty on wild dogs or dhole (Cuon alpinus) for a year. Their contention
was that wild dogs were responsible for decreasing the sambar population. However, they soon
realised that wild dogs were very much a part of the ecosystem and the bounty was withdrawn.
The Wildlife Protection Committee has taken up a number of activities in the years 2004 and
2005. These include, among others, regular monitoring of the prohibitions, plantations of fruit
trees to attract birds, fencing of some vulnerable areas, erecting signboards about the rules and
regulations for the sanctuary.

Impacts of community effort

According to the villagers, protection measures are quite strong because youth are involved in
protection. The extent of protection is obvious from the fact that in normally silent surroundings,
as soon as one enters the wildlife reserve the ears are filled with a cacophony of birdcalls. In the
absence of any assessments and studies either by the village community or outsiders, it is difficult
to understand the exact impact of the conservation effort.

Conclusion
There are dozens of wildlife conservation efforts in Nagaland. Most villages have cordoned off
portions of the village and left them completely inviolate. This clearly shows that village communities
understand the need to create inviolate zones for biodiversity conservation. In Sendenyu, villagers
are clear that the effort is not meant for any kind of recognition or gain, but just to ensure that
there is wildlife for future generations.

This case study has been compiled by Neema Pathak based on a two day trip to the village
by Neema Pathak and Ashish Kothari of Kalpavriksh, Pune; Feroz Ahmed and Bibhab Talukdar
of Aranyak, Guwahati; and Joy Das Gupta of ICIMOD, Kathmandu in February 2005. Many
thanks to Mr. G. Thong, a citizen of the village and a government officer in Nagaland. We are
also grateful to all the villagers for making this trip possible and sharing information with the
team.

For more information contact:

Mr. G. Thong
(Wildlife Warden, Sendenyu village)
Assistant Director (NCE)
Directorate of Rural Development, Kohima
Bayavu Hill, P.Box 232, Nagaland. 797001
0370-2270033 (O)
0370-2100202 (R)
0370-2270674 (R)
09436000417
E-mail: gwasinlo@yahoo.com

Endnotes
1
Forest Development Authority (FDA) is a fund created by the Central Government on the lines of District Development
Authority (DDA) where funds come directly to the Divisional or District level and can be given directly to the concerned
villages, such that it eventually leads to forest regeneration and protection.
 Nagaland 457

Annexure 1 Sendenyu Village Council Wild Life Conservation Act, 2001

case studies - nagaland

 CCA/Nag/Kohima/CS3/Toufema/Forest protection

Toufema village, Kohima

Background
Toufema is one of the larger villages in Kohima District, with a population of about 5000 (2001
census), and is well-known for being one of the two ‘tourist villages’ in Nagaland, the other being
Khonoma. The village has received much attention in the past few years because it is the home of
the current (2005) chief minister of the state, Neiphiu Rio. Located at an altitude of 1800 ft, the
village provides a panoramic view of the surrounding area.

Towards community conservation

Of the total area, 1600 ha is under community forest. In the 1990s, the Toufema Village Council
(TVC) had orally pronounced a ban on hunting and felling in this forest reserve located on a hillside
above the village. However, this ban was not very effective. In 2001 the TVC therefore passed a
formal resolution re-affirming the ban, and stopping all kinds of resource uses (including firewood
collection, grazing, wild food gathering, and hunting) inside the reserve.
This resolution came simultaneous to, and apparently motivated by, the declaration of this village
as a ‘tourist village’, with investment from the state government into developing tourism cottages,
a museum and other facilities for visitors. The village donated part of the land being used for
shifting cultivation to be used for the development of a tourist complex in the village. The tourist
complex has been designed based on the local architecture and construction style. Each hut for the
tourists has been constructed by one khel (hamlet) in the village, based on their traditional style
of construction.
In recognition of their efforts towards conservation of forests and wildlife, the state government has
since 2003 also extended some financial assistance (through the Forest Department) for bamboo/
wood fencing, patrolling, construction of a tourist reception centre, and other related works.
The motivations for declaring the reserve appear to be multiple. Foremost was an increasing
concern over the rapid decline of wildlife and forest cover, as rampant hunting and tree-felling had
taken their toll. Elders of the village were concerned that the younger generation would never know
what it was to live with wildlife. The village intends this area to be a breeding centre from where
animals can increase and spread outside too. Another motive was protection of water sources, as
villagers had heard from ‘learned people’ that these would dry up if forests disappeared.
The land in the reserve is mostly community-owned, but there are also small patches of land
owned by individual families, which have been donated by them to the village. Initially, they were
allowed to continue using the area for some cultivation if they wanted, but over time they have
been encouraged to give this up for forest regeneration and conservation. In return, they have
been promised a share of benefits that may be generated from the conservation initiative, such as
from ecotourism. It is not clear if they will get an extra share to compensate for their loss.
Since the forest is shared between Toufema and its offshoot settlement Botsa, a joint Forest
Survey Committee has been constituted for monitoring observance of rules, looking after the
forest and catching violators. Patrolling is done frequently in the non-rainy seasons.
Fines for violations range from Rs 1000 to Rs
5000, depending on the nature of violation. Since
case studies - nagaland

2001, two cases have been dealt with. One (in

2002) involved the trapping of a squirrel and a
wild cat, in which two persons were fined Rs 2000
each. The other (in 2005) was for cutting two trees,
in which the violator was fined Rs 5000 and the
timber was confiscated. The violators were all from
Toufema itself; so far no violation by outsiders has
been recorded. Village rules require that if offenders
do not pay the fine, no benefits from the village
would be extended to them, and, if they persist in
Toufema village and surrounding forest committing offences, they would be chased away
Photo: Ashish Kothari from the village.
458
 Nagaland 459

Impacts of community effort

Villagers report that whereas most wildlife had disappeared earlier, the conservation initiative
has resulted in its reappearance. Wild mammals that are increasing in number (or can once again
be seen, even if only occasionally) include barking deer, Asiatic black bear, jungle bat, serow, wild
pig, Himalayan crestless porcupine, slow loris and several squirrel species. Occasional leopard
sighting or pugmarks are reported. There is also reportedly a marked increase in birdlife, including
kalij pheasant and red jungle fowl. A checklist of over 100 bird species has been prepared by
Kalpavriksh team during their field visit, based on observations by villagers. There is no independent
checklist of flora and fauna, but the Tourist Village managing committee has initiated the process
of making one.
The Kalpavriksh team observed that the protected forest appears to be quite diverse and very
dense in patches. Some old trees seem to have survived the earlier deforestation, but most of the
forest is young. Quite a lot of bird-calls (relative to other parts of Nagaland, where forests are quite
silent) were heard on a very brief visit into the reserve area.
Economic benefits are being derived by the community from this initiative, though the extent
is not clear. Water sources have reportedly become more reliable, but the initiative may be too
recent to judge whether this is a direct cause-and-effect relationship. Villagers hope that if more
people become aware about the tourist facilities and conserved forests, then ecotourism will bring
in major resources to the village.

Opportunities and constraints

It is not clear if there are direct or indirect economic benefits linked to the conservation initiative,
though of course this has not been a motivation for the initiative in the first place. Links between the
conserved forest and the ecotourism initiative are made by villagers, though there did not seem to
be many comments from visitors (in the visitors’ register maintained in the Tourist Village) relating
to the conservation work. The tourism committee is aware of the need to increase local capacity
relating to flora-fauna identification, and of providing greater guidance on this to visitors.
Several families appear to have been adversely affected at the time the ban on hunting and
resource use was imposed, as they lost out on collection of fuelwood, wild foods, medicinal plants
and other resources, including some for sale. However, it is now felt that the negative impacts have
lessened, as wildlife has spread to adjoining areas from where people can still collect/hunt it. In
addition, many of the edible wild plants are now cultivated by villagers. This is an aspect requiring
further study; in particular, the impact of the conservation initiative on poorer households needs
investigation.
There is some discussion about wanting to reintroduce Hoolock gibbons and some monkey species
into the conserved area, since these species were earlier found here. Expert opinion from outside
may need to be sought before such a step is taken.

This case study has been put together by Neema Pathak, based on information provided by
Kevilhousa Kense of the Toufema Tourist Village, and Thesuohie Kense, Head Gaon Burra of
Toufema village, Nagaland, during a visit to the village by Ashish Kothari, Shantha Bhushan
and Neema Pathak of Kalpavriksh in October 2005.

For more information contact:

case studies - nagaland

Kevilhousa Kense
Tuofema village
Kohima District
Nagaland
Mobile: 9436005002
2270786/2100064
 CCA/Nag/CS4/Phek/Chizami and neighbours/Forest protection

Chizami and neighbouring villages, Phek

Background
As has been described in the case study on Luzuphuhu village (also in Phek district) towards the
late 1980s and early 1990s, as the impacts of forest degradation in Nagaland began to hit people,
a debate started independently in different parts of the state about forest conservation.
Phek was one of the districts where such debates resulted in many decisions and their successful
implementation. The district is inhabited largely by the Chakhesang tribe, occupying 80 villages. All
80 villages have an umbrella organization called Chakhesang Public Organisation (CPO).1 Although
the idea about preservation of wildlife was continuously being discussed in annual CPO meetings,
it was reinforced during the annual meeting in 1999 when Mr. Pusazo Luruo was the chairperson.
After much discussion on the issue, the CPO general session adopted the following resolutions for
all 80 villages to implement:
• Ban on buying pork (staple food along with rice) from outside the district. This was done with the
intention of saving money and promoting the local economy.
• Seasonal ban on hunting all across the district between 1 February to 31 June (breeding
season).
• Ban on fishing with explosives.
• Ban on indiscriminate burning of forests.
• Declaration of complete no-hunting zones wherever possible.
Till 2005, 23 villages had adopted the resolution for declaring inviolate wildlife reserves. In
addition, all 80 villages in the district have accepted the seasonal restriction on hunting and
prevention of indiscriminate forest fires. The village councils (VC)2 are held responsible for
penalising the offenders in case of violations. Fines are imposed on those found responsible for
hunting and spreading fires. Of the total fine amount collected, 50 per cent goes to the informant
and 50 per cent to the village body. If the VC fails to check these incidents within their jurisdiction
after adopting the resolution, then the CPO penalises the VC for violations. The penalty could
include reduction in the village development funds, as the CPO has a say in how the district-level
funds should be distributed to respective villages.
A group of 6 villages (Chizami, Enhulumi, Mesulumi, Choba, Zelome, Thetsumi) is surrounded by
a large patch of forest (area could not be estimated but covers many hills and valleys, seemingly
extending to hundreds of hectares). There are differences of opinion among the villagers about the
exact boundaries of all these villages. Probably because of this, or because of the distance from
the respective villages, these forests have never been used for shifting cultivation and rarely used
for forestry purposes other than hunting.
The stretch of forest between Pfutsero and Chizami villages has, in fact, been identified as one
of the Important Bird Areas (IBAs)3 in Nagaland due to the presence of endemic species such as
birds like Blyth’s tragopan, grey sibia, beautiful sibia, white-naped yuhina among birds and serow,
and mammals like the spotted linsang.
Influenced by the CPO resolution, the six villages have in the past tried to get together to declare
this patch of forest as protected. However, the effort did not succeed and currently attempts are
case studies - nagaland

on to revive the initiative.

Towards community conservation

1990-91 Ezikerhiwu Committee (named after a lake, Ezikerhiwu, believed to be inhabited by
an evil spirit, on top of the forested mountains) was constituted to protect the forests that form
a compact block between the six villages. However, after 2-3 years the effort failed mainly for
two reasons: inability to control the grazing of mithun (a cross between a cow and gaur, semi-
domesticated by many communities in North-East India) by 3 villages (with about 25 households),
and continued hunting by some villagers. Those violating the committee’s rules were not fined, so
other villagers were also encouraged to renew hunting and other activities that had been banned.
460
 Nagaland 461

In 2004, the village council of Chizami resolved to restart the process, and has requested the
Ezikerhiwu Committee chairman to activate the work. A letter has been sent to the remaining five
villages about this. It is felt that if the majority of villagers agree, then those keeping the mithun
or wanting to hunt will be forced to stop; the former could adopt controlled grazing of mithun or
sell them off.
For the management of the jointly owned forests a two-tier system is envisaged. Each village has
a committee of its own to protect the forests that fall within its boundaries, and all villages together
have a joint committee to manage the forests which are disputed or jointly owned. Although the
exact area is not known, it is estimated by the villagers to be over 100 sq km.

Impacts of community effort

Since the earlier effort did not last long, impacts cannot be told; however, the forest seems to
be in good condition. The status of wildlife is difficult to tell, but according to Mr. Thopi, General
Secretary, Chakhesang Public Organisation (CPO), wild animals that continue to be found include
Blyth’s tragopan, barking deer or chital, wild boar, and Asiatic black bear (very few), among
others.

Opportunities and constraints

A key constraint seems to be the lack of unity amongst the villagers to deal with the problem of
mithun grazing and hunting. The joint committee is attempting to deal with this.

This case study has been put together based on information provided by Mr. K. Thopi, Chizami
village, Nagaland, during a Kalpavriksh visit to Phek district in Nagaland in February 2005.

For more information contact:

K. Thopi
General Secretary, Chakhesang Public Organisation (CPO)
Chizami village
Phek district
Nagaland

Endnotes
1
Composed of the village council members, VDB members and youth aAssociation members of all Chakhesang
villages in Phek district.
2
The first unit of decision-making in Nagaland. A VC is an attempt at amalgamating the traditional decision-making
systems in Nagaland and the Panchayati Raj institutions of the Government of India.
3
IBAs are sites of international importance for the conservation of birds and their habitats. IBAs are among the
world’s key sites for biodiversity conservation, and the concept developed by the Birdlife International Partnership
facilitates their identification nationally using data gathered locally following globally agreed and standardised criteria.
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani Important Bird Areas in India: Priority sites for conservation (Indian Bird Conservation
Network: Bombay Natural History Society and BirdLife International UK, 2004).
case studies - nagaland
 CCA/Nag/CS5/Phek/Luzophuhu/Forest protection

Luzophuhu village, Phek

Background
Nagaland is occupied by about 15 different tribal communities. Each of these communities is
culturally distinct from the other and occupies different parts of the state. Nearly 90 per cent of
land is under community ownership. About 85 per cent of the state is still under forest cover.
Originally hunter-gatherers, these communities have an intricate land-use system, with land
distributed between shifting cultivation (communal ownership of land), settled agriculture (private
land ownership), and forest reserves (family-, clan- or community-owned) to meet food, fruit,
fuel, timber and other needs. Wild meat is an integral part of tribal culture here. Most families own
guns and go hunting regularly. Increasing population and heavy dependence on timber and forest
produce for livelihood is also impacting the quality of forests. The combined effect of degrading
forests and a high rate of hunting have led to a quick decline in wildlife populations, particularly
of wild animals. Towards the late 1980s and early 1990s, some realisation about the degraded
state of forests began to hit people. Drying up of water resources, declining availability of wild
vegetables and declining population of wild animals were among some of the reasons that created
debates among many tribal communities.
Phek District was one of the districts where such debates resulted in many decisions and their
successful implementation. The district is occupied largely by the Chakhesang tribe, occupying
80 villages. All 80 villages have an umbrella organization called Chakhesang Public Organisation
(CPO).1 The idea about preservation of wildlife was continuously being discussed in annual CPO
meetings. It was reinforced during the annual meeting in 1999 when Mr. Pusazo Luruo was the
chairperson. After much discussion on the issue, the CPO general session adopted the following
resolutions for all 80 villages to implement:
1. Ban on buying pork (staple food along with rice) from outside the district. This was done with
the intention of saving money and promoting local economy.
2. Seasonal ban on hunting all across the district between 1 February and 31 June (mating
season).
3. Ban on fishing with explosives.
4. Ban on indiscriminate burning of forests.
5. Declaration of complete no-hunting zones wherever possible.
By 2005, 23 villages had adopted the resolution for declaring inviolate wildlife reserves. In
addition, all 80 villages in the district have accepted the seasonal restriction on hunting and
prevention of indiscriminate forest fires. The village councils (VC)2 were held responsible for
penalising the offenders in case of
violations. Fines are imposed on
those found responsible for spreading
fires and hunting. Of the total fine
amount collected, 50 per cent goes to
the informant and 50 per cent to the
village body. If the VC fails to check
these incidents within their jurisdiction
after adopting the resolution, then the
case studies - nagaland

CPO penalises the VC for violations.

The penalty could include reduction
in the village development funds, as
the CPO has a say in how the district-
level funds should be distributed to
respective villages.

Community hall at Luzophuhu village Photo: Ashish Kothari

462
 Nagaland 463

Towards community conservation

The resolutions of the CPO about seasonal hunting and declaration of wildlife reserves inspired
about 23 villages to declare inviolate zones for wildlife. Luzophuhu village, along with Chizami,
Runguzu, and Kikruma were some such villages.
Luzophuhu village is located about 16 km from Phek district headquarters. The village council
of Luzophuhu decided to declare an area of about 500 ha as a Village Forest Reserve. The main
objective of protecting this forest area, located at the highest point of the village, was to preserve
the water source of the village. Villagers felt that clear-felling for jhum was gradually reducing the
availability of water in the source and hence decided to forbid jhum in this area. To avoid serious
economic impact of forgoing jhum, they decided to instead use this area for raising commercial
plantations. Raising plantations, they believe, would ensure water security as well as provide
economic benefits to the people. In the forest reserve all other kinds of uses are allowed. Hunting
is also allowed except between January and June.
Inspired by the CPO resolution, the youth group in Luzophuhu discussed the possibility of declaring
an area as an inviolate wildlife reserve. The VC decided to declare 250 ha as a wildlife reserve
in 1990. A wildlife reserve is a much stricter category than the forest reserve, as no hunting or
any other forest use is allowed. According to the youth club members, this patch of forests was
selected because of its proximity to the village, making it easier to protect and also because they
believe that this patch is a breeding ground for the deer.
The land under forest reserve as well as wildlife reserve was originally used for jhum cultivation.
The forest reserve had an incentive of growing commercial plantations; however, the area under
wildlife reserve came with no such incentive. According to the youth club members, some villagers
strongly opposed this but had to eventually succumb to the pressure from the VC and the youth
organisations. The impacts of this declaration on the people are not known. In Luzophuhu village,
the protected area is directly under the supervision of the VC, while the responsibility for imposing
rules and extracting fines lies with the youth organisation. 50 per cent of the fine levied goes to the
informant, while the other 50 per cent goes to the student union. Depending upon the violations,
the fines are in the range of Rs 100–200. Till the year 2005, 3-4 cases of violations had been
recorded.
In addition, the village has also banned fishing and use of explosives in a 2-km stretch of Lanye
River near the village. The primary reason for this protection is the fact that the villagers would
otherwise no longer have a supply of healthy and big fish when VIPs visit the village. The fish
in this stretch are now only caught when VIPs visit or for very special occasions, and never for
commercial purposes.

Impacts of the initiative

In the absence of any studies, exactly how the initiative has impacted the wildlife or ecology of the
area is not clear at this stage. However, the area still supports a population of threatened species,
such as Mrs. Hume’s pheasant and kalij pheasant, among others. Some other birds recorded from
the area include ashy bulbul, orange-bellied chloropsis, grey-hooded warbler, whiskered yuhina,
green-backed tit, chestnut thrush, silver-eared mesia and blue-throated barbet.

Conclusion
The village council and the student union members have expressed a desire to be supported
in their efforts. This support could come as financial help to pay some wardens for forest
case studies - nagaland

protection, or as capacity building for the village youth to take on the ecological monitoring
of the protected areas. The support could also be in the form of helping the village work
out forest-based livelihood generation activities for the youth. So far there have been few
links between the protection activities and possibilities of generating livelihoods. There is a
proposal submitted by the CPO to the chief minister to declare Phek district as a tourism
zone. Villagers hope that some amount of tourism will boost their economy.
464 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

This case study has been compiled by Neema Pathak based on a trip to the village by Neema
Pathak and Ashish Kothari of Kalpavriksh, Pune; Feroz Ahmed and Bibhab Talukdar of Aranyak,
Guwahati; and Joy Das Gupta of ICIMOD, Kathmandu in February 2005. We are also grateful to
all the villagers for making this trip possible and sharing information with the team.

For more details contact:

Zachichu Vese (General Secretary, LSU)
Zhokusheyi (Library Secretary)
Vesusayi (VC member)
Lozaphuhu Student’s Union

BPO Lozaphuhu Village

PO Phek
Phek District
797108
Nagaland
0370-205116 (Birbal, Marwadi Merchant)

Pusazo Luruo Vice president, Nagaland People’s Front; Proprietor, Christian Home School,
Mission Compound
Phek Town
Nagaland
0370-2243760
03865-223455 (Phek)
09436005905
duzollus@yahoo.com (Veduzo s/o Pusazo)

Endnotes
1
Composed of the village council members, VDB members and youth association members of all Chakhesang villages
in Phek district.
2
The first unit of decision-making in Nagaland. A VC is an attempt at amalgamating the traditional decision-making
systems in Nagaland and the Panchayati Raj institutions of the Government of India.
 CCA/Nag/Other villages

Other villages, Nagaland

Background
In addition to the detailed case studies presented in this volume, Nagaland is full of stories of
different village communities having regulated the use of certain patches of forests in various ways.
Some have declared hunting bans; others have prescribed no forest use at all; while yet others
have declared seasonal ban on hunting or other uses. The degree of success in implementing the
rules also varies from community to community. In Zonheboto and Phek districts, signposts have
been put up along many roads by village youth associations, warning readers that the area is under
strict protection. According to wildlife enthusiasts who visit the state regularly, these signboards
are effective enough to deter hunters. In a state like Nagaland this is of great significance. These
areas are among the few where one can see direct signs of any wildlife in the otherwise silent
forests of Nagaland. Some of the examples on which we could not gather detailed information are
briefly presented below.

Changtongya village, Mokokchung district1

The village council of Changtongya village in Mokokshung district has declared the entire village
as a no-hunting zone. The council resolved that no one would be allowed to kill wild animals or
use poisons for fishing here. Those found violating these rules would be penalised. It was also
resolved to plant wild fruit trees in the forest and jhum (shifting cultivation) areas. The council
decided that the moratorium on hunting would initially be for five years, and would be extended
further if animal and bird populations increase. It was also clarified that the ban was on hunting
for commercial purposes or for sport, and that seasonal hunting with limited opportunity may be
permitted.

Kongan (Naginimora block), Mon district2

Mon District is largely inhabited by the Konyak tribe. Konyaks are traditionally ruled by hereditary
chiefs known as Anghs. The village council, which is called Ching Woipa in Konyak dialect, consists of
representatives from each clan of the village; normally the heads of the eldest families of the clans
are deputed to it. This august body handles the overall affairs of the village, and its functions may
be classified into administrative, executive and judiciary functions. The village council formulates
village policies and supervises forest use within the communities and between the clans. The
village has community land, owned by the entire community; clan land, owned by various clans
together; and private lands. The village council is responsible for management of the community
land and resolving of conflicts as per the customary laws. The village council’s mandate is to protect
and conserve the forests in the village by issuing orders to protect forests from forest fires and
encroachments. The Kongan Village Council has also issued orders banning hunting of wild animals
and use of explosives and poisoning of the rivers for fishing. The private forests are taken care of
by individuals. The usufructs (resources required for day-to-day use) from the community lands
are equally distributed among
the villagers. The village is also
part of the state government’s
Joint Forest Management
scheme.
case studies - nagaland

Kikruma village, Phek

district3
In Kikruma village, after
deciding on declaring a wildlife
reserve the VC faced a challenge
as to which land to declare as
a wildlife reserve. The land in
the entire village is individually
Elders of Kikruma village with community forest in the background owned, and villagers were not
Photo: Neema Pathak
465
466 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

ready to part with their land. The VC then decided to buy the land from those who were ready to
sell it. Since water conservation was one of the main objectives, the land on the top of the ridge
was selected. The VC lobbied with the local MLAs and managed to get sufficient resources to buy
all the land covering the top of the ridge, which was being used for jhum cultivation. This area
covers about 70 ha. Subject to availability of funds, the village elders intend to buy off more land
along the same ridge. This forest is currently being used to meet the firewood requirements by the
villagers and hunting seems to be still prevalent here.

Zanibu Peak, Phek district4

Typically whenever a very large patch of forest (sometimes extending to a few hill ranges, covering
possibly over a hundred sq km) was under no-use zone, it indicates possibilities of ownership
conflicts between two or more villages. This appeared to be the case in the forests being protected
by Runguzu village along with Thevopitsu, K.Basa, K.Bave, Thiphuzu, Phesachadu, Porba, Sakraba
and Pholami. Zanibu peak and surrounding mountains protected by these villages are considered
an area of biodiversity significance by conservationists working in Nagaland.5 They have also been
declared an Important Bird Area (IBA) by Bombay Natural History Society, following the BirdLife
International indictors. During our visit it was very obvious that this patch of forest was having
an ownership dispute among these villages. However, there also was a management committee,
which consisted of the VC chairpersons of all these villages, for the management of these forests.
We could not get a better understanding of how this committee functions or how the individual VCs
coordinate with each other on matters related to these forests.

Chishilimi village, Zonheboto district6

According to K.N. Chishi from Chishilimi village in Zonheboto District, in 1995 the villagers realized
that they had nearly destroyed the environment. The village council decided to protect wildlife
in the village. The village has 100 households with a jhum cycle of 18 years. Villagers decided
to protect area falling under two jhum cycles on the western part. There are no fixed laws and
regulations for protection, except for a resolution passed by the village council. The responsibility
to protect wildlife rests with the entire village. No collection of forest produce and hunting is
allowed in the Protected Area. Villagers continue to hunt in areas outside the reserve. However, if
the animal enters the reserve then it cannot be hunted. In addition, hunting through ambush has
been banned in the entire village. The major threat in the village is from the neighbouring villages,
which continue to hunt in the Protected Area. After the hunting by neighbours continued, Chishilimi
villagers decided to confiscate and sell the weapons used for hunting by the offenders. 50 per cent
of this money is given to the informer and rest goes to the village council. Some violations by local
villagers themselves have been brought to the notice of the VC. The VC has recently re-affirmed
the resolution.

Tizu river, Zonheboto district7

In another initiative in Zonheboto district, the fish population in Tizu River had reportedly declined
due to the use of explosives and other destructive means of fishing. Villagers around the river
decided to come together and ban the use of explosives in the river. Violation fines are shared with
50 per cent going to the informant and the rest to the gaon bura (GB) Union. In 5-6 years fish
population has increased substantially. According to the villagers the effort was initiated out of a
concern for the fish population and with no other objective.
As mentioned above Chakhesang Public Organisation has declared a seasonal hunting ban in Phek
district. Seasonal hunting bans are also in operation in Sendenyu village and some other villages
across the state. Hunting bans are largely in the breeding season, which is from February to May.
This is also the most active hunting season, as agricultural responsibilities are few. As Pusazo
Louru of CPO said, ‘Seasonal hunting ban can restrict hunting. One cannot impose a complete ban,
this would antagonise people and the effort would backfire.’
In all the efforts mentioned above whatever the institution for decision making and management,
nearly in all villages the youth groups are responsible for implementation of rules and extraction
of fines. In many cases part of the fines thus generated goes to these groups for various activities.
Youth, therefore, are very actively involved in these protection initiatives.
 Nagaland 467

Endnotes
1
Source: Anon., ‘Nagaland village declared no-hunting zone’, Sentinel, 29 January 2002.
2
Source: Hockto Sema, Divisional Forest Officer, Dimapur and M.Lokeswara Rao, Conservator of Forests (NTC),
Kohima, ‘Community Forestry in Kongan village: A Case Study’, undated.
3
Source: Field visit to Phek District by Kalpavriksh team in 2005.
4
Source: Field visit to Phek District by Kalpavriksh team in 2005.
5
Personal conversation with Dr. Anwaruddin Choudhury in March 2005.
6
Source: Presentation by K.N. Chishi (also Additional Secretary in Department of Law and Justice, Nagaland) during
a workshop on Biodiversity and Communities in Nagaland, organised by Kalpavriksh, Nagaland Empowerment of
People through Economic Development (NEPED) and ICIMOD at Kohima on 24 February 2005.
7
Source: Presentation by K.N. Chishi during a workshop on Biodiversity and Communities in Nagaland, organised by
Kalpavriksh, Nagaland Empowerment of People through Economic Development (NEPED) and ICIMOD at Kohima on
24 February 2005.

case studies - nagaland

Orissa
Community based forest and wildlife conservation
in Orissa
1. Background
1.1 Location and biogeography
Orissa is located between 17°50' and 22°30' N latitudes and 81°24' and 87°28' E longitudes, on
the east coast of India. It covers an area 1,55,707 sq km. The average minimum temperature is
2.6°C and the maximum temperature is 49.6°C. The state has a 482 km-long coastline with the
Bay of Bengal on its east. It receives an average rainfall of 127.98 cm.
The state is drained by major rivers like Mahanadi, Brahmani, Indravati and Kolab with a river
basin catchment of 20,000 sq km and above. The area is characterised by discontinuous hill
ranges extending from the Similipal hill ranges in the north and the Eastern Ghats in the south,
and interspersed with rivers flowing in the eastward direction in the central tableland and coastal
plains region.
According to the 2003 Forest Survey of India records, the total recorded forest area is 5.81
million hectares, which constitutes 37.34 per cent of the geographic area of the state1.
The state can be divided into four distinct physiographic regions: Northern Plateau, Eastern Hills
(Ghats), Central Tableland and Coastal Plains. The northern plateau is undulating with masses of
hills with steep slopes to east and north. The Eastern Ghats stretch in NE to SW direction south
of the Mahanadi River. The central tableland is intersected by the river valleys of the Baitarani,
Bramhani and Mahanadi rivers. The coastal plains are very narrow along the Bay of Bengal, which
stretch for about 482 km out of the country’s coastline of 7,516 km. The waters of Bay of Bengal
along the coastline create a network of estuaries and lagoons.
As in other states in peninsular India, in Orissa too forests are now mostly relegated to the
hills, with the plains and flat grounds having been put under plough for agriculture and other
non-forestry practices. The forests broadly fall under five out of the 16 groups differentiated
by Champion & Seth: i) tropical semi-evergreen, ii) tropical moist deciduous, iii) tropical dry
deciduous, vi) subtropical broad-leaved hill, and v) littoral and swamp.

1.2 Biodiversity
The number of plant species occurring in Orissa has been estimated at 2754. In all 86 mammals,
473 birds, 110 reptiles and 1119 amphibians have been reported. Out of these 23 species of
mammals, 16 species of birds and 17 species of reptiles are considered threatened. The important
mammals in the state are spotted deer, nilgai, blackbuck, four-horned antelope, sloth bear,
elephant, tiger, leopard, gaur, sambar, barking deer, wild buffalo, among others. The notable
aquatic fauna in the state are saltwater crocodile, olive ridley turtle, fresh- and brackishwater
terrapins, a diversity of waterfowl, king crab, and marine mammals like dolphins. The state has an
important population of the endangered Irrawaddy dolphin.

1.3 Socio-economic profile

The population of Orissa is 36,804,660 (2001 Census), accounting for 3.57 per cent of the
population of the country.2 Scheduled castes (SCs) and scheduled tribes (STs) constitute 16.5
state chapter - orissa

per cent and 22 per cent respectively of the total population of the state. Scheduled areas cover
nearly 45 per cent of the total geographical area. Orissa’s tribal population comprises 62 different
ethnic communities, classified into six groups according to their traditional practices: hunting,
collecting and gathering; pastoralism and cattle-herding; artisanal occupations like basketry and
blacksmithry; shifting cultivation, terrace farming; and settled cultivation. Agriculture continues
to be the main occupation along with others like fishing, livestock rearing, and small-scale and
cottage industries.
The total livestock population in the state was 250.20 lakh (25.02 million) as per the livestock
census of 1995. The state is endowed with vast mineral deposits like coal, iron ore, manganese
ore, bauxite, chromite, etc. Other important mineral resources of the state are limestone, china
471
472 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

clay, quartz, precious and semi-precious stones, copper, vanadium, etc.

Orissa occupies the tenth position in the country both in terms of territory and population. The
state is divided into three revenue divisions and 30 districts. Parts of Orissa state (the predominantly
tribal areas) are under Schedule V of the Constitution. Seven districts, six tahsils and three blocks
are Schedule V Areas, covering 69,613.8 sq km, with a population of 88,70,884. The Tribal Sub-
Plan approach was adopted in the Fifth Plan of the state and the Special Component Plan for SCs
was adopted in the Sixth Plan.

1.4 Conservation
Demographic changes, urbanization, vehicular traffic, and
industrial and mining activities are reported to be causing depletion
of natural resources in the state. 24,124.20 hectares of forestland
have been diverted to non-forest use as on 31 January 2000, for
a variety of reasons.
The state has two national parks (NP) (parts of Bhitarkanika and
the core of Similipal) and 18 wildlife sanctuaries (WLS), covering
a total area of 7,959.85 sq km. Similipal, in Mayurbhanj district,
has been declared a biosphere reserve. Similipal was also till very
recently the lone tiger reserve in the state, while parts of Mayurbhanj,
Mahanadi and Sambalpur have been declared elephant reserves.3
Other relevant projects and programmes in Orissa are wetlands,
mangroves and coral reefs conservation (WMCC), joint forest
management (JFM), eco-development in and around national parks
and sanctuaries, project turtle, and biodiversity conservation.
Chilika is Asia’s biggest brackishwater lake. A narrow isthmus
separates Chilika from the waters of the Bay of Bengal. Spread
over an area of about 1100 sq km, the lagoon is an internationally
important wetland and Ramsar site4. It is also a hotspot of
biodiversity including phytoplankton (43 species), algae (22
Statue of a fisherwoman, Humma species), vascular plants (150 species), protozoa (61 species),
temple, Sambalpur district
nematode (37 species), platyhelminthes (29 species), polychactes
Photo: Smita Ranjane
(31 species), brachyura (28 species), decapoda (30 species),
mollusca (136 species), fish (225 species), amphibians and reptiles (37 species), birds (156
species) and mammals (18 species). The lagoon is also identified as a priority site for conservation
and management by the National Wetlands, Mangroves and Coral Reef Committee (NWMCC) of
the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), Government of India. The Chilika Development
Authority (CDA) received the Ramsar Wetland Conservation Award in 2002 for the efforts to revive
the lake, which had begun to die in the 1980s as a result of several factors.5
The other Ramsar site in the state is Bhitarkanika, spread over 65,000 ha. It harbours 63 species
of mangroves and is classed as a reptilian paradise. It is home to the world’s largest saltwater
crocodile (upto 6.8 metres length) whose population stands at more than 1200. It also holds
sizeable populations of smooth-coated otters and fishing cats. More than 190 species of birds have
been recorded. The area is internationally famous for harbouring the largest rookery of olive ridley
turtles, on the seashore flanking the Gahirmatha marine sanctuary.
Four additional Ramsar sites are proposed in the state.6 There are also seven Important Bird
Areas (IBAs) recognized by the Indian Bird Conservation Network (IBCN).7

2. Community-based conservation 8

Orissa has a long tradition of community conservation, as also a number of more recent community
initiatives. These range from forest conservation to the protection of specific wildlife populations.

2.1 Community forestry9

Traditional practices, some of which continue, include the protection of sacred sites (see Box 1),
and a number of spiritual and cultural beliefs that help in conserving nature across the landscape
(see Box 2).
 Orissa 473

Box 1
Sacred groves10
The institution of sacred groves in the state is recognized by various names like jahera,
thakurnama, etc. Ecologists believe that these groves are repository of gene pools and act
as reservoir of biological diversity because these are protected since ancient times, and act
as “climax forest”, which harbour variety of flora. Such islands of climax vegetation amidst a
degraded landscape can be seen in many parts of Koraput and Kalahandi districts. The maximum
number, 322 sacred groves, were recorded from Semiliguda block of Koraput district.
The concept of sarna dharma originates from the common traditional religious institution of
“sacred grove” found in the tribal villages, which is regarded as the seat of one or more than one
important village level deities including the village tutelary designated differently among various
Mundari-speaking and Dravidian tribes of Chhotanagpur and surrounding regions, comprising
a large contiguous tribal belt covering parts of the states of West Bengal, Jharkhand, Orissa
and Madhya Pradesh. Literally, the term sarna is a Mundari word meaning sacred grove and
the term dharma is an Indo-Aryan linguistic term, ordinarily meaning religion. A tree in a sarna
may not be damaged or felled without the leave of the pahan (village priest) who however,
would first offer a sacrifice in the sarna where the trees stand.
Noted ethnographer S.C Roy observed that every Oraon (a tribe) village has the supernatural
institution of sarna or grove of sal trees dedicated to their mighty tutelary deity Chhala Pacchho
(or the old lady of the grove) who is also known by other names such as sarna burhia and
jhakra burhia.
The munda, an important Kolarian-speaking major tribe of Orissa, who are also the immediate
neighbours of oraons, share the common institution of sarna with the latter, though there
are differences in their nature of religious beliefs, rituals as well as orientations. The Munda
pantheon is composed of their supreme deity, Sing Bonga (The Sun God) at the apex, followed
by the nature gods, ancestral spirits, village deities, etc. These deities or gods save the village
from diseases and calamities and bring prosperity.
The concept and practice of sarna extends to another major and important Mundari-speaking
tribe the santal, living in the same habitat and eco-cultural region as those of the oraon and
munda. This holy institution in a santal village is called jaherthan, or jahera in short (holy grove).
The santals believe that deities residing in the holy grove do welfare for the santal villages.
Despite carrying a great tradition behind them sacred groves today are facing various threats.
Change in the values, change in the living styles and certain economic forces have greatly
contributed to the decline in the status of the sacred groves, particularly in tribal areas of
Orissa. Large-scale land conversion is seen in many sacred groves. Even though the sacred
groves have established their virtue as a rich repository of ecological, cultural and sociological
information they are not being given enough attention by the government agencies.11

Orissa stands apart from other states for providing numerous examples of community-based
and self-initiated institutional arrangements for protection and management of forest resources.
Popularly known as community forest management (CFM), such initiatives are found in almost all
the districts of the state, with higher concentration in Nayagarh, Bolangir, Mayurbhanj, Koraput,
Dhenkanal, Nabarangpur and Phulbani districts. Thus, a large forest area in Orissa is now de facto a
common property managed by communities, though these are de jure state property.12 Community
forestry initiatives are manifestations of rural communities’ response to forest denudation. Usually,
the leading role is played by the poorer and marginalised sections of society, whose lives and
livelihoods are embedded in forests. Besides livelihood concerns, ecological effects of forest
degradation—loss of soil fertility at the foothills, erratic rainfall and drying-up of streams—have
state chapter - orissa

also played a significant role in inducing forest protection by local communities. CFM initiatives have
brought recognition and pride to many villages and have been a strong driving force motivating
the non-protecting villages in the neighbourhood to undertake protection and regeneration of
degraded forest patches. CFM has thus resulted from a desire to save forest patches for posterity
and also quite strikingly from an urge to assert the villagers’ control over the forest patch that is
otherwise open to all.13
The existence of about 10,000 forest protecting communities protecting around 10-12 per cent of
the total forest area in the state is strong evidence of extensive spread of CFM which has evolved
over a period of time. The factors that played a key role in facilitating CFM in the state are:14
• Presence of strong informal village organizations
474 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

• Ambiguous status of protected forests

• Regeneration of forests being a ‘gain-gain’ situation (i.e., all stand to gain) for all the sections of
the community.

Box 2
Nature and tribal spiritual beliefs15
“‘…Most tribes believe that the sun god is the creator and master of the universe and call it by
many names. The Juangs and Bhuyans call it Dharam Devta, the Kohla and Santals Sing Bonga.
Other tribes worship other deities from nature as the creators of the universe. The worships
of the earth is common. Called the Basumata by Santals, Bhuyans and Juangs, Dharani by
Kandhs, and Basuki Thakurani by Kolhas, the worship of the earth goddess acquires special
significance, for a good harvest starts every cultivation.
‘Food for the tribals consists of roots, leaves, flowers and fruits that they get from the forests.
They therefore, not only worship the forests, but also revel in religious ceremonies and festivals
connected with it. Bhinjals and Parajas call their forest god Danger Devta, Bandas call it Uga
and Remngbori, Kolhas call it Bura Bonga, Khandhs call it Laipenu and so on. Considering
nature as their creator, sustainer and provider, the tribals have imbibed a deep love for nature
that is primeval and instinctive….
‘….Sal, neem and asan trees are considered sacred, Zahira by both Santals and Kolhas,
because their village deities dwell in it. Rivers, streams and hills are also the objects of tribal
worship. Bandas call their stream deities Kapur Chuan and Doliang, and Kandhs Gungipenu.
The deity is variously called Buru Borga by Santals, Vinding by the Bandas, and Bhinapenu by
the Kandhs.
Karma is a beautiful example of tree worship among the tribal people in central and eastern
India. Karma festival, though it is more a tribal festival, is well within the fold of the Sambalpur
folk tradition. The numerous tribes of the states, namely, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and
West Bengal celebrate the festival. The adorable deity of Karma festival is Karamsani who is
represented by a branch called Karma Dal. This type of personification of a branch as devi
is not surprising as trees have held a special place in the spiritual tradition of ancient India.
Karam Sani has been regarded as the goddess of vegetation, fertility and destiny. It may be
noted here that Karam Sani can be identified with a twig branch of different trees in the same
or different places. For example, in Sambalpur, a branch of the sal tree represents the deity.
The Nagesia from Chhattisgarh and the Oraons, Mundas and Santals of various places worship
Adina cordifolia (kurum).
‘Forests are not only one of the major sources of their subsistence, but are also significantly
related to their religion and mythology. The Kandhs of Ganjam claim descent from a woman,
whose body parts are supposed to be made of bel fruit, sandalwood and kawal mushrooms.
Tribals of Kalahandi believe that their ancestors survived by drinking the juice of “Salap” tree
after a catastrophe of “Ban Devta” the forest as a god to be appeased ensures the renewal of
the species while working as a self-imposed law against the destruction of forest….
‘…But there are also some aspects of tribal culture which adversely impact biodiversity – tribal
annual hunt (Sandrakarka) and podu cultivation. In the past when there was immense forest
coverage and unlimited wild forest animals, these did little harm. But in the present context these
aspects of tribal culture are to be restrained, maybe through persuasion and awareness-raising.
‘The symbiotic relation between the tribals and natural environment is disappearing fast due
to the loss of beliefs, change in crop as well as food patterns. Tribals were well acquainted
with medicinal plants in forests and were depending on these herbal medicines for treatment
of all kind of ailments. But with rapid change in their behaviour and attitude they moved from
indigenous herbal practices to modern medicines; hence those indigenous practices as well
as the list of priceless ethnomedicinal plants have been lost. In addition to that, weakening
of religious beliefs and the changing attitude of the communities are adversely affecting the
traditional ways and means of effective conservation practices. That leads to extinction of more
rare and endangered flora and fauna.”

A historical trail (see also Box 3): The history of forest protection by local communities dates
back to the pre-independence period in Orissa. In fact, in some of the tribal-dominated areas, such
as Nabarangpur and Keonjhar, forest protection initiatives have been reported in the pre-1900 and
 Orissa 475

1900-1930 periods respectively.16 Further, the oldest recorded CFM case—Lapanga in Sambalpur
district—exhibiting strong traditions of forest protection has been in existence since 1936. By the
60s, as a spontaneous response to forest degradation, many villages in Western Orissa took to
forest protection on their own. The 1970s and 80s experienced extensive spread of community
forestry efforts in different parts in the state. The forested regions, which witnessed degradation and
the resulting implications earlier, were the first to take to CFM. Over the period, the communities
in the neighbourhood of forest protection villages, moved by the gains of protection, joined in the
movement. Another factor which triggered the movement has been increasing hardships faced
by the local communities in meeting their subsistence needs (such as firewood and small timber)
because of declining forest resource as well as due to curtailment of access to community protected
forest areas.

Box 3
Timeline of CFM in Orissa17
1900-40 Initiation of forest protection by communities in Sambalpur and Nowrangpur
1941-50 Forest Protection initiatives in Koraput, Keonjhar and Mayurbhanj regions
1951-60 Forest Protection initiatives in Nayagarh, Cuttack, Bolangir
1970-80 Initiation of forest protection initiatives in massive scale in Dhenkanal, Keonjhar,
Mayurbhanj, Phulbani, Deogarh and Sundergarh regions

Diverse institutions and practices: CFM embraces creativity, flexibility and diversity in
institutional arrangements and protection and management practices. The local institutions
engaged in forest protection include village councils, youth groups, women groups, etc. Protection
system(s) comprise one or a combination of arrangements, such as merely keeping an eye on the
forests, thengapalli (i.e., voluntary patrolling on rotation basis) or paid watchmen. The customary
practices of thengapalli and household contribution facilitated involvement of all the people in
protection efforts. This popular patrolling practice of thengapalli has received accolades at the
international level. thengapalli has been introduced as an innovative method for forest protection
and social mobilisation in the cross-cultural curriculum for the students of the 6th standard under
the new education policy in Britian in the year 1988.18
Similarly, punitive measures also vary, such as social pressure or monetary punishment, and
are decided taking into account the nature of the offence. Elaborate rules and regulations based
on local experiences and common prudence are evolved, addressing a wide range of issues such
as forestry conflicts, benefit sharing, protection systems, management, equity, and social capital.
These characteristics are evidence of the participatory and democratic spirit of CFM. The CFM
movement is, thus, driven by the basic philosophy outlined below:19
• Draw a balance between conservation and livelihoods
• Forest needs to be sustainably managed for succeeding generations
• No timber harvesting
• Stress on minor forest products for livelihoods
Over time, CFM has evolved as a socio-cultural movement and is not restricted to forest protection
alone. In certain areas communities engaged in forest protection named themselves as ‘forest
caste’ to strengthen the relationship existing with the forest. CFM in many cases also helped
the local communities in establishing new relationships through marriage. Some communities
prohibited marriage of their children in non-protecting villages. An interesting practice is followed
in some CFM villages, particularly in Nayagarh district, where every newly wedded couple during
state chapter - orissa

marriage goes for planting trees to mark the beginning of their conjugal life.20
Perspective of forest management – Moving towards self-sustenance: CFM groups have
different views and thoughts about policy contours and principles of forestry policy for the state. In
this context, at a state-wide consultation process during the period 1997-99 facilitated by the NGO
Vasundhara and the NGO network Sanhati, CFM groups designed an alternate policy framework for
community forest management.
This people’s charter on forestry contained the following principles:
1. Give primacy to local needs over national needs; and seek to take steps in the direction of
establishing forests as a local resource.
476 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

2. Environmental stability and services and local needs fulfilment should be the primary objectives
of forest management; revenue objectives for the State should take a back seat.
3. Local communities should be the basic unit for management of forests. Most forest areas should
be brought under community-based management, including Wildlife Sanctuaries and National
Parks.
4. Conceptually, local communities that take up protection and management responsibility should
be viewed as trustees for managing the forests on behalf of the larger human community. Local
communities should however have clear management rights over the forests they are entrusted
with managing.
5. The local rural population depends critically on forests for subsistence and livelihood needs.
This dependence becomes especially critical in case of NTFP. NTFP policies should be guided by
welfare considerations and should seek to maximize gains to primary gatherers instead of being
guided by revenue considerations.
6. While pursuing the goals of social justice and equity, mechanisms to safeguard the interests
of weaker sections, including women, in forest management have to develop. Community
institutions that take up management of forests should have representation of all sections
and should have mechanisms to ensure that interests of all sections are reflected in forest
management after a fair negotiation process.
Combining the twin objectives of resource sustainability and livelihood security: In
most of the areas forests had reached a denuded condition and were left with only root-stock when
protection was initiated. The collective actions of local communities have resulted in regeneration
of good forest stock leading to revival of the lost biodiversity. According to a study undertaken by
Ashoka Trust for Research on Ecology and Environment (a national-level NGO) on impacts of CFM
in Kandhamal district which comes under Schedule V area (consisting of high tribal population),
forest cover shows an increase from 53.7 per cent to 67.2 per cent in the study area between
1991 and 2001. The study findings attribute the increase in forest cover to protection of forests
by local communities. A similar observation has also been made in the State of Forest Report
(1999) published by the Forest Survey of India showing a remarkable increase in forest areas in
Mayurbhanj and Balangir districts to the tune of 90 sq km and 10 sq km respectively between 1997
and 1999 because of existence of protection efforts by the villagers. Besides improvement in forest
conditions, it has led to improvement of water regimes, enrichment of soil nutrients, reduced soil
erosion, and ensured regularity in rainfall, thus contributing to strengthening of forest-agriculture
ecological linkages.
Strengthening collective power through networking and alliance building: Community
forestry institutions operate at different scales in terms of their spatial dimensions. These operations
can be found in the form of individual efforts or collective efforts by federating together at different
levels. Federation building emerges out of the need of building up collective strength, enhancing
cross-learning, improving resilience to deal with externalities, resolving intra- and inter-community
conflicts and, more importantly, to act as a pressure group for establishing community rights over
forests.21 In Orissa, such federations have evolved over the years and a state-level federation
named Orissa Jungle Manch has been formed since 1999 (see Box 4).

Box 4
Community forests in Ranpur block22
In the Ranpur block of Nayagarh district itself there are 180 villages protecting several sq
km of contiguous patches of forests. Gadabanikilo, situated in Khairpalli Gram Panchayat,
started protection in 1940. This village has today developed a scientific management system,
including zoning to serve different purposes. Years of protection has resulted in well-stocked
forests and excellent plant diversity. In Gundrubari and Degajheri villages, women have formed
little patrolling groups to regularly check any illegal activities in their forests. Interestingly,
many forest protecting villages in Ranpur are now reporting the presence of elephants in their
forests. There is a possibility that with disruption of elephant corridors in other parts of Orissa,
elephants are now turning towards the regenerating or old-growth community forestry sites.
Today all 180 villages, some with multi-caste and -class composition and some homogenous,
have come together to form a block-level federation. The federation provides technical support,
a forum for discussions, facilitation of dialogue with politicians and government agencies, and
conflict resolution.
 Orissa 477

Impacts of joint forest management: The Orissa

state government introduced joint forest management
in 1993, as part of its commitment to move towards
participatory forestry. Theoretically, the JFM resolution
looked upon the local communities as equal partners
with the FD in protection and management of forests
and seemed to be more progressive in comparison to
earlier policies.
The period following 1993 witnessed the constitution
of van samrakshan samitis (VSS) as one of the main
activities of the FD. A close look into the JFM trend in
the state reveals a sudden increase in number of VSSs
in the year 1999. As a result of mounting pressure
from the ground for legal recognition to the protection Villagers meet with NGOs at Dengajhari
efforts, the then Chief Minister made a commitment village, Nayagarh Photo: Ashish Kothari
to constitute VSSs in all the forest-protecting villages.
Following this, the VSS formation process was carried out hastily by the FD in different parts of
the state. The FD claims to have constituted 9,606 VSSs, undertaking protection of 8,518 sq km of
forest areas in the state till September 2005.23
These forest management systems were meant to include and empower the community but the
nature of empowerment remained very limited.24 Joint forest management has been in the state
for more than a decade but it has simply refused to take off. JFM is facing strong opposition from
community forest management groups in the state. This is primarily because of the fact that in
reality JFM has failed to yield ‘devolution’ in forest governance. Furthermore, JFM has reportedly
been used as a strategy to co-opt CFM and to enable the FD establish and expand its control over
the forest areas which are under the de facto control of local communities. In this context, a basic
question arises: where does JFM stand in terms of devolution?
JFM has not been successful in achieving the stated objectives of decentralisation and
democratisation of forest governance. JFM was supposedly to be a ‘process’, but it has been
implemented in a programmatic mode, placing the FD as a donor and the people as beneficiaries.
This hardly makes for a relationship of equality and trust between the two partners.25 This has
been one of the major factors leading to emerging tensions between JFM and CFM. As a result, in
many instances CFM communities have simply rejected JFM.
Some of the major disjuncts between CFM and JFM are described as under:
• Uniform organizational structure vs. diverse local institutional arrangements: The
recently enacted JFM resolution of 2000 by GOI talks about facilitating a uniform structure for JFM
committees: formation as a society in all the states and registration of all JFM committees under
the Society Registration Act, 1860. This is in contrast to diverse institutions and organizational
arrangements under CFM, which undergo changes in response to internal dynamics, local
situations and context. Moreover, local communities also find the limit of forest area to be
allocated to a joint forest management committee unacceptable.
• Unequal power relationship: JFM, though it professes to treat local communities as equal
partners, structures an unequal power relationship, putting the authority of decision-making in
the hands of the FD. Forest officials have done very little to address equity and gender issues.
On the contrary, in certain cases forest officials’ support to the elite sections has resulted in
appropriation of benefits by the latter. JFM has also failed to promote equitable and democratic
participation of all sections. Despite the provision for 33 per cent representation of women in the
Executive Committee, this hardly takes place. These processes have resulted in marginalisation
of forest-dependent people, particularly women.
• Benefit sharing – Local needs vs. timber orientation: The most contentious issue in JFM
state chapter - orissa

has been that of benefit sharing. This system reflects the ‘timber/revenue-oriented’ attitude of
the FD, whereas local communities have initiated forest protection with the primary objective of
ensuring a sustained flow of forest products (especially NTFPs) and commercialisation of forest
resources has never been in their protection agenda.
Recent state government moves: In 1996, the Orissa Ministry of Forest and Environment
came out with another resolution seeking to declare community-protected forests as ‘Village
Forest’. The resolution provided for considering the village as the unit for management of forest
resources. This has been considered a progressive resolution as it talked about the tenurial rights
of the forest-protecting communities. The implementation of the resolution however, witnessed
lack of political will and interest on the part of forest officials, and it remained as a dead letter in
478 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

the official records.

In contrast, the Orissa Forest (Amendment) Bill 2000 came as a result of advocacy by the FD
for stringent laws and enhanced penal powers by bringing in necessary amendments in the Orissa
Forest Act 1972. However, the introduction of this bill was carried out without undertaking any
public debate or consultation with forest-protecting communities. This evoked strong criticism
from CFM groups and they argued that legal recognition to their protection efforts and tenurial
rights was necessary for ensuring sustainability of ongoing protection efforts.
Another response to the forest crisis was the central government’s National Afforestation
Programme (NAP). Despite good intentions of promoting decentralization and enhancing people’s
participation in forest governance, the NAP has failed to achieve desired results. This has been
primarily due to the approach and the process of implementation, which continues to be centralized
in nature. The new institutional structures created under the NAP—the forest development agency
(FDA) at a divisional level and van suraksha samitis at the village level—were implemented in a
top-down manner.
The implementation of the FDA programme has adversely affected the locally evolved processes
established for ensuring transparency in CFM. The local CFM groups were accountable to the public
for giving details of local contribution collected for development of forests. However, following
the conversion of CFM to VSS under FDA, these processes were disrupted. Under the changed
situation, community members were generally not kept informed about financial matters.
The FDA has emerged as a classic example of co-opting community forest management groups
and bringing them under JFM. The communities were promised tenurial rights over protected
forest patches and huge funds for developmental activities in return for constituting VSSs. This
led to a rush among the local communities to form VSSs, even at the cost of the disintegration
of the self-initiated institutional structure. The selective approach of the programme and funding
to limited groups promoted friction within the local communities and resulted in breakdown of
collective protection efforts going on for a long period.
The self-initiated community forest protection arrangements thrive upon equal participation,
equity, transparency, accountability, etc. The community-based forest protection arrangements
ensured participation of all sections through adopting thengapalli (voluntary patrolling) and
token household financial contribution for protection and management of forests. This upheld the
collective spirit of the community. These processes however, suffered a heavy setback following
the implementation of FDA programme. The flow of FDA funds resulted in abandonment of the
thengapalli system and there was an increased preference by VSS members to replace the voluntary
patrolling system with a watcher appointed on FDA money. Further, the FDA programme showed
a marked departure from the processes of democratic participation by nurturing the leadership of
powerful vested interest groups. The implementation of FDA also affected the established processes
of transparency maintained in CFM practices. These processes, along with the conflicts perpetuated
by inequity and lack of transparency, severely undermined the ownership of communities over
the forest protection initiatives. This is best illustrated by the feelings of an old man from a
Gadabanikilo village in Nayagarh district that represents a case of old CFM converted to VSS under
FDA. ‘We had been protecting forest for years but there were never any differences among the
people. Our village was a model village. People of all religions, Hindu, Muslim, collectively observed
the local religious functions. However, formation of VSS along with flow of money skilfully divided
the village into factions.’26
Furthermore, policy-level processes—such as the Orissa Forestry Sector Vision process with
Winrock International India, and the Orissa Forestry Sector Development Project seeking a loan
from the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), have taken place without any consultation
with CFM groups. For these reasons CFM groups under the banner of Orissa Jungle Manch protested
against the JBIC loan. Despite this, the proposal got approved in the state legislature in May
2006.

2.2 Coastal and marine conservation

Orissa’s coastline of 480 sq km supports amongst the world’s largest turtle nesting and waterfowl
wintering grounds, along with considerable other wildlife. Community efforts are visible at various
points here too.
Mangalajodi is one of the many villages located along the banks of the Chilika Lagoon. Thousands
of migratory waterfowl visit or breed in the wetlands around this village. Till the year 1996-97,
killing the birds and selling in nearby areas was one of the major sources of income for the villagers.
 Orissa 479

A proficient poacher would earn up to Rs 40,000 in a month! Members of an NGO called Wild Orissa
got involved with the village since the year 1996 and began to talk to the villagers about protection
of birds. Initially they faced serious difficulties but eventually, with the help of enthusiastic and
knowledgeable individuals in the village, the Sri Mahavir Pakshi Suraksha Samiti (Bird Protection
Committee) was constituted in 2000. Its efforts have almost completely eliminated bird poaching
here, and some of the ex-hunters have become die-hard conservationists. In 2007, the state
government awarded the Pakshi Bandhu Award to the committee.
Olive Ridley turtles nest in tens of thousands on the Rushikulya, Gahirmatha and Bitarkanika
beaches. While the latter two are under official protection, Rushikulya is protected by the local
community. This site was unknown to the scientific community before 1994. At that time, fisherfolk
from Purunabandha, Palibandha, Gokhurkuda and Nuagaon, who are entirely dependent on the
estuary and the offshore waters for their livelihood, used to collect and eat or sell the turtle eggs.
It was through the involvement of researchers from the Wildlife Institute of India during the early
90s that some youth from Purunabandha became aware of the threatened status of the turtles
and the need for their protection. In 1998-99 the youth formed a group of their own (Rushikulya
Sea Turtle Conservation Committee) and started creating awareness about turtle conservation in
the area. The Committee has built an interpretation centre with support from the Vasant Sheth
Memorial Foundation, and they are now trying to earn a livelihood through regulated tourism in the
nesting/hatching season. Similar initiatives have now been taken up by the youth in Gokharkuda,
Pallibandha and Nuagaon villages. Gokharkuda village has constituted the Matsyajivi Kaincha
Suraksha Sanghathan (Fisherfolk Turtle Protection Committee). These villagers not only protect
the turtles on land but have special fishing norms during the mating and nesting times to avoid
turtle deaths in sea. These norms, about the kind of nets and fishing boats used and the fishing
zones, have been developed with the help of outside experts.

2.3 Conservation of other species

Most of Orissa’s public probably first heard the
name of Buguda village when it was awarded the
first Biju Patnaik award for wildlife conservation.
Located in Ganjam district, this village has been
traditionally protecting a large population of blackbuck.
Documentary evidence traces this protection at least
as far back as 1918. However, in the last fifty years the
protection measures have been further strengthened
as the population of this animal was dwindling because
of poaching and other reasons. As a result, villagers
report that the number has risen from about 100 to
over 500. Reportedly about 60 per cent of the village
has been left fallow due to lack of water, and crop
damage by blackbuck. Yet anyone found hunting the Blackbuck conservation in Buguda village,
animals is apprehended by the villagers. The protecting Ganjam District Photo: Ashish Kothari
villagers believe that these antelopes are devotees of
Lord Rama and Lord Krishna and that it is a sin to kill them.

2.4 Government-initiated community-based initiatives

Orissa has also witnessed the substantial spread of government-initiated participatory processes
such as joint forest management. As of early 2000, there were 6,686 van samrakshan samitis,
involving 6,346sq km forest land. Similarly, 4,928 village forest protection committees (VFPC) had
been formed, who now protect 10,077.05 sq km of degraded forests, mostly secondary natural
forests of coppice origin. The wave started in 1988 and picked up momentum in 1993 because of
state chapter - orissa

government facilitation (see Table 1). The growth of secondary forests through protection from
felling, fire and grazing resulted not only in generation of adequate biomass (fuel and fodder) for
the villagers, but also contributed to increasing the diversity of plants and animals. Village doctors
throughout the state’s tribal belt have testified that medicinal plants which were thought to have
been wiped out from their areas have reappeared after such protection.
However, civil society organizations have pointed to two serious problems with JFM and other
participatory forestry initiatives by the government. First, these initiatives retain substantial control
and power in the hands of the FD. Second, they have often led to the undermining of existing self-
initiated community forestry initiatives (see next section).
480 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

2.5 Threats faced by CCAs

Despite occasional awards, a majority of community conservation efforts in the state remain
unrecognised by the state government. They find no place in laws, policies, administrative
programmes or budget allocations. Although many of the initiatives exist on government lands,
villages often find it difficult to solicit support from the government while discharging their duties.
For example, women in Dengajjheri village have expressed disappointment that when culprits
are apprehended, they keep waiting for forest officials to turn up to carry out the necessary
procedures. Such lack of support dampens the spirit of the communities.
On the contrary, at times governmental intervention has disrupted community initiatives.27
There is no learning from the community forestry initiatives in the state-run JFM scheme, which
continues to be top-down. JFM functions with pre-prescribed, strait-jacketed and rigid institutional
set-up and decision-making processes. This conflicts with the self-initiated adaptive management
system. Institutions formed under JFM create new centres of political powers in the village which
often have vested interest and clash with the traditional forest protection mechanisms in these
villages. A number of NGOs in the state have been demanding that community forestry initiatives
should be recognised as a system of forest governance, and financial and other support should
be extended to them as and when required rather than them having to convert to JFM. There has
been widespread protest against the government taking loans from donors like the JBIC (Japan
Bank for International Cooperation) within the current institutional framework. Under such loans,
the government is under greater pressure to show successful JFM sites, leading to more and more
community forestry sites getting converted to JFM.
Often community conservation sites are threatened by ‘development’ projects imposed by the
government. For example, the proposed Utkal Coal Project at Raijharan for open cast coal mining
is in an area densely covered with sal forests, under protection of Raijharan, Nandijhor, Goalgadia
and Similisahi villages. In fact these villages were even brought under the official JFM programme.
In a public hearing held in September 2005, more than 1500 people from 22 villages gathered and
strongly opposed the project as it would destroy the forests that they have worked hard to save.
Similar leases are currently under consideration in Sundergarh, Sambalpur, Jharsuguda, Koraput,
Malkanagiri and Raygada districts at the time of going to the press.
In many instances internal politics and local dynamics itself threatens the initiatives. Some
initiatives are quite resistant to such changes and keep switching from low-protection phases
to high-protection phases. Appropriate external guidance and support in these cases can help.
Such help can come in the form of self-evolved federations as exist in Ranpur Block, or sensitive
governmental or NGO interventions.
Some sensitive interventions have indeed helped. The Chilika Development Authority, for
instance, has built a walkway and watchtower at Mangalajodi, which would help in generating
some tourism revenue for the village. NGOs like Vasundhara, Wildlife Society of Orissa, Wild
Orissa, and forums like the Orissa Marine Resources Conservation Consortium initiated by ATREE
and others are providing critical support.

3. Conclusion
Clearly villagers are doing much for biodiversity conservation in Orissa, even if unrecognised.
But they need urgent help, especially if they are to survive the current phase of destructive
industrialisation that Orissa is going through. Many community initiatives are struggling trying
to create livelihood options linked to their conservation efforts. For example, youth in Rushikulya
region as also in Mangalajodi are hoping for ecotourism-based livelihoods. In Buguda village,
villagers could do with some help towards water harvesting to irrigate the fields they still cultivate.
In many community forestry initiatives, villagers are seeking help in creating some natural
resource-based enterprises or increase in agricultural productivity. Appropriate help at the right
time and in consultation with the local villagers will help create a long-term stake in conservation
of biodiversity in the state.
The fact that many of these conservation efforts have held on for so long against all odds is
enough to indicate what they can achieve given an appropriate policy
environment. Equally important, they could provide critical lessons for
how to manage the official wildlife sanctuaries and national parks of the
state, in a way that integrates the livelihood requirements and rights of
 Orissa 481

local people with the needs of wildlife conservation.

Table 1: Information about formation of VSSs, VFPCs and unregistered groups in forest
management in Orissa

Sr. Forest Division No. of Area protected No. of Area No. of Area
No. VSSs (in ha) VFPCs protected (in unregistered protected
formed ha) groups (in ha)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Angul circle
1. Angul 256 37586.18 98 17751 28 NA
2. Athamalik 84 7017.36 155 26254 0 0
3. Athagarh 77 7349.59 76 7207 0 0
4. Dhenkanal 112 13774.98 148 30550 68 3996
5. Keonjhar 201 16322.14 197 20697 4 0
Total: 730 82050.25 674 102459 100 3996
Berhampur circle
6. Puri 28 5580.0 83 17507 10 2003
7. Nayagarh 5 585.0 55 10824 44 7049
8. Ghumsar 22 702.0 55 28617 0 0
North
9. Ghumsar 85 13489.3 160 35058 0 0
South
10. Parlakhemundi 518 46639.0 106 10237 0 0
11. Phulbani 473 29504.0 214 54237 143 5102
12. Baliguda 206 10378.0 56 34280 0 0
13. Boudh 162 52222.6 150 5260 10 760
Total: 1499 159099.9 879 196020 207 14914
Sambalpur circle
14. Sambalpur 423 58941 11 1615 0 0
15. Rairakhol 97 9676 111 45986 11 425
16. Deogarh 62 3103.96 222 34477 188 30308
17. Bamra 256 22396.66 138 26349 0 0
18. Sundargarh 437 48110.17 59 11715 10 489
19. Bonei 119 8496.452 145 32016 0 0
Total 1394 150724.24 686 152158 209 31222
Koraput circle
20. Jeypore 466 27628.24 139 10058 196 58493
21. Nawarangpur 371 31995.06 503 115796 0 0
22. Rayagada. 748 48133.55 586 105464 0 0
23. Balangir 325 36882.31 457 98351 38 6216
24. Kalahandi 669 52840.00 551 164115 12 0
25. Khariar 270 21268.00 81 8276 0 0
Total 2849 218747.16 2317 502060 246 64709
S.T.R. Baripada
26. Karanjia 22 2164.2 220 36729 7 0
27. Baripada 191 21822.37 152 19372 0 0
Total 213 23986.57 372 56101 7 0
Grand Total: 6685 634608.12 4928 1008798 769 114841
state chapter - orissa

Source: State Level Steering Committee (SLSC) and Nature & Wildlife Conservation Society of Orissa(NWCSO).2003.
Orissa Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Prepared under National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Ministry
of Environment and Forests (Government of India).

Put together by Ashish Kothari, Kalpavriksh; Information for Section 1 compiled by Saili S.
Palande, Kalpavriksh. More information on community conservation initiatives in Orissa is
available in a brochure “Surakshya se Samrakshan: Few Unacknowledged Struggles for Nature
Conservation in Orissa”, produced by Vasundhara (see www.cciori.org; contact: Y. Giri Rao,
ygiri.rao@gmail.com).
482 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Endnotes
1
http://www.fsi.nic.in/sfr2003/orissa.pdf
2
The source for figures in this paragraph is Primary Census Abstract: Census of India 2001 (www.censusindia.
net/t_00_005.html)
3
Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, Annual Report 2002-2003 (New Delhi, MOEF, 2003). In
early 2008, a new tiger reserve (Satkosia) was declared, over an area of 963.87 sq km, with a Critical Tiger Habitat
of 523.61 sq km.
4
An international category assigned to wetlands of global biodiversity significance.
5
A. Kothari, Birds in our Lives (Hyderabad, Universities Press, 2007).
6
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani, Potential Ramsar Sites in India (Mumbai, IBCN/BNHS and Birdlife International, UK,
2006).
7
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani, Important Bird Areas of India: Priorities of Conservation (Mumbai, IBCN/BNHS and
BirdLife International, UK, 2004).
8
The section (other than the sub-section on Community Forestry) is based on N. Pathak, A. Kothari, S. Misra, and
Y. Giri Rao, ‘Surviving against all odds: Community conservation initiatives in Orissa’, Hindu Survey of Environment,
2006. The sub-section on Community Forestry is based on R. Panigrahi, ‘Democratization of Forest Governance:
Myths and Realities (An analysis of implications of decentralized forest policies and processes in Orissa, India)’, Paper
presented at the Eleventh Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Property,
19–23 June 2006, Bali, Indonesia (Bhubaneshwar, Vasundhara, 2006).
9
Largely based on Panigrahi, 2006, as above. See also Forests, Trees and People Newsletter, No. 42, June 2000.
Inputs also received from Neera Singh, Vasundhara.
10
Paraphrased from: State Level Steering Committee (SLSC) and Nature & Wildlife Conservation Society of Orissa
(NWCSO), 2003, as above; and K.C. Malhotra, Y. Gokhale, S. Chatterjee and S. Srivastava, Sacred Groves in India:
An Overview (Bhopal, Indira Gandhi Rashtriya Manav Sangrahalaya, 2000).
11
Largely based on Panigrahi, 2006, as above. See also Forests, Trees and People Newsletter, No. 42, June 2000.
Inputs also received from Neera Singh, Vasundhara.
12
Sashi Kant, Neera M. Singh and Kundan K. Singh, Community Based Forest Management Systems (Case Studies
from Orissa) (New Delhi, IIFM, SIDA and ISO/Swedforest, 1991).
13
Neera M. Singh and Kundan K. Singh, ‘Saving Forests for Posterity’, Down To Earth, May 1993.
14
Kant et al. (As above).
15
State Level Steering Committee (SLSC) and Nature & Wildlife Conservation Society of Orissa (NWCSO), 2003. (As
above).
16
Community Forestry, RCDC, Vol. 1/Issues 1 & 2, January 2002; Vol.1/Issue 5, September 2002; Vol. 2/Issue 3,
February 2003; Vol. 2/Issue 4, May 2003; Vol. 3/Issue 3, February 2004.
17
Source: State Level Workshop on “CFM: Ways Forward”, Bhubaneswar, 22nd December 2005.
18
Kant et al., Community Based Forest Management Systems.
19
RCDC, ‘Community Forest Management: Agenda for the Future’, Background note shared in state-level workshop
on ‘CFM: Ways Forward’, 2005.
20
RCDC, ‘Community Forest Management: Agenda for the Future’. (As above).
21
Neera Singh, Federations of community forest management groups in Orissa: Crafting new institutions to assert
local rights Forests, Trees and People Newsletter, 46, September 2002, pp. 35-45.
22
Pathak et al., 2006. (As above).
23
Website of forest department, Government of Orissa.
24
Madhu Sarin, Neera M. Singh, Nandini Sundar and Ranu Bhogal, ‘Devolution as a threat to democratic decision-
making in forestry? Findings from three states in India’, in D. Edmunds and E. Wollenberg (eds), Local Forest
Management: The Impacts of Devolution Policies (London, Earthscan Publications, 2003).
25
Community Forestry, RCDC. (As above).
26
Vasundhara, ‘Development Policies and Rural Poverty in Orissa: Macro-analysis and Case studies’, Unpublished
report (Bhubaneshwar, Vasundhara, 2005).
 CCA/Orissa/CS1/Dhenkanal/Rupabalia/Forest protection

Rupabalia reserved forest, Dhenkanal

Background
Dhenkanal district is known to have the highest area of forest under protection and management
of local villagers in Orissa. The total area under protection is estimated to be 56,500 ha, protected
by 264 village communities. The protection extends to 4.67 per cent of the total reserved forests
in the state, and to 18.7 per cent of the other categories of forests.1
Rupabalia reserved forest (RF) is located in Dhenkanal district near Joranda town, which is at
a distance of 24 km from the district headquarters. Rupabalia is a hillock surrounded by eleven
villages, out of which eight villages—Atinda, Mahapada, Vejibolua, Nathua, Chattia, Birikhunti,
Bhatkatni and Barahota—are managing the entire Rupabalia RF. These villages have divided
amongst themselves over 900 ha of Rupabalia RF and about 700 ha of surrounding khesra2 forest
for use and management.
The current human population of these eight villages varies between 160 (Vejibolua) and 1185
(Mahapada). In three villages—Chatti, Barahota and Bhatkatnim—the dominant section of the
community are the SC/STs. The other five villages are more heterogeneous. Economically, except
Mahapada and Birikhunti, in all the other six villages almost the entire population is below the
poverty line. The majority consists of the landless, who survive on agricultural labour and other
day-to-day means of income. Even in the other two villages, the percentage of such population is
high.
Rupabalia hillock contains two types of forests: mixed forests on hilltops and upper slopes, and
sal forests on lower slopes and foothills. The common species in mixed forests are shalmali or
red silk-cotton tree, amaltash, dhaoda, jamun, amla and Bridelia retusa. The sal associates are
beheda, hirda, mahua, kendu, haldu, etc.
Prior to independence, this area was under the princely state of Dhenkanal. The demarcation of
Rupabalia hill was complete in 1933, and it was declared a reserved forest in 1959 by the state
forest department.
The local people enjoyed the privileges and concessions in accordance with the Dhenkanal
and Hindol Forest Rules and Durbar Declaration of 1939. Scientific management of forests in
Dhenkanal state was started in 1929. This compartment was prescribed the Coppice Working
Circle. The working plan of 1978-98 admits that this was a complete failure and mentions: ‘The
following blocks probably didn’t contain good forest growth with adequate coppice vigour and
contained steep hills which could have been excluded from coppice working…Rupabalia…The
hilly areas including steep slopes which had been allotted to coppice working circle have been
completely devastated and probably the adoption of this faulty system of management is primarily
responsible for this calamity which could have been averted.’ Subsequently, Rupabalia was put
under Rehabilitation and Plantation Working Circle. Till 1982-3, about 172 ha was treated by the
forest department by digging trenches, protection from grazing, and artificial regeneration. Since
1982, the department has not taken on any forestry operation in this forest, possibly because by
this time the communities had taken over the responsibility of protection and sustainable use.

Towards community conservation

It is not clear exactly how the protection of forests by the local villagers began. It is believed
case studies - orissa

that protection started spontaneously in some villages and then spread to others. Initially only the
khesra Forests were taken up but later the protection extended to the reserved forests too.
The conditions which seem to have encouraged community protection and management of
forests include:
1. High scarcity of fuelwood and construction material;
2. Almost uniform dependence of all sections of society on forests, particularly for fuelwood and
construction material;
3. Possibility of uniform distribution of material benefits;
483
484 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

4. Mutual trust in each other;

5. Common expectations of people; and
6. The impacts of awareness camps.
In the early 80s, a workshop on forest protection was organised at Nathua village by Professor
Radhamohan in collaboration with the People’s Institute of Participatory Action and Research
(PIPAR). This workshop left a major impact on the villagers and some more villages took up forest
management.

Village organisations for forest management

Generally, informal village committees are responsible for forest management. In a few cases,
either the sahi committee (committee of a particular caste) on its own, or together with the
informal committees, manages the forests. For example, in Birikhunti, a sahi known as Nuasahi
has a separate patch of forest, which is managed by the Nuasahi Committee, while the other patch
is managed by the informal committee for the rest of the village.
The informal committees in Mahapada have become defunct after a series of conflicts. Presently
four sahi committees are managing their individual patches of forest. Generally, the informal village
committees and sahi committees together manage the village ponds, temple, village common
agricultural land and schools. However, in Vejibolua (a hamlet of Mahapada), villagers formed
a forest protection committee in 1972 exclusively for the management of the forest. Now this
committee is also taking up other developmental activities.
In the cases of Birikhunti, Chattia and Nathua, the informal committees have merged with village
developmental committees to avoid duplication of committees.
Generally, an informal forest protection committee consists of a general body, an executive body and
office-bearers. The general body has representatives from each household of the respective village.
The sahi committees are generally caste-homogeneous, though sometimes a few families of different
castes may also stay in a sahi and participate in the sahi committee. Normally the office bearers
belong to the dominant caste, except in Bhatkatni, where the secretary of Saurasahi is a Brahmin.
Sahi committees function in a more informal manner compared to the village committees.
The tenure of committees is normally not fixed except in Nathua (three years) and Bhatkatni
(one year). The general body, if not satisfied with the functioning, can change the executive body
and the office-bearers at any time.
Meetings of the committee are normally arranged as per the requirements except in Vejibolua,
where the committee meets every month. The working of village committees and informal forest
protection committees is more systematic than sahi committees. Normally the minutes of the
meetings of village committees are recorded and signed by the members present. Every committee
has funds under its control, which is kept with the secretary or the treasurer, except at Atinda
where it is kept in a bank. All accounts are kept open to villagers and are presented at the annual
general body meeting.
The working of informal forest protection committee of Veijibolua is highly systematic and at
every meeting all details of participation, accounts and activities are recorded.
In addition to the informal forest management systems mentioned above, the forest department
has also constituted official forest protection committees (FPCs) under a Government Resolution
of 1988. As per available information, Rupabalia RF has been allotted to ten villages. All revenue
villages, except Chattia, which are managing Rupabalia for the last few years have been included in
these ten villages. In addition, five villages which are not among the villages informally protecting
the forests (some are not even close to these forests) have also been included. Except in Nathua
and Birikhunti villages, the villagers are not even aware of the existence of such a formal committee.
In Nathua, since the Sarpanch is also the head of the formal committee, the formal committee is
functioning in the village.

Forest management system

Even though legally these forests are categorised as Class B Reserved Forest, which demands
strict administrative prohibitions, local villagers exercise significant control over these forests.
Local villagers have framed their own rules and regulations relating to:
1. The composition, functions and duties of the committees and the office bearers;
 Orissa 485

2. Villagers’ roles in protection, extraction and distribution of forest produce;

3. Conflict resolution; and
4. Penalties for defaulters.
The system of resource use is based on the sense of reasonably balanced sharing. All community
members have relatively equal access to resources, calculated according to the needs and supply
from the existing forest. Each member is assured that others will not take undue advantage
at their expense. Penalties are strong disincentives for using forest resources in a manner not
sanctioned by the community.
Each committee has its own set of rules, which change and evolve over time and are often
based on the same guiding principles of equity and sustainable use. The set of rules for one of the
villages, Vejibolua, are given below.

Box 1
Rules in Vejibolua village
A. Rules related to composition and functioning of the forest protection committee
1. All villagers have an equal right to become a member of the committee.
2. An executive committee, consisting of four members and five office-bearers, will manage
the forests on an everyday basis.
3. The executive committee shall be selected by consensus.

B. Rules related to forest management

1. Only members of the general body have equal rights to the forest. Any outsider will have to
approach the committee for permission.
2. Each member will protect the forest on the days allocated to him in the system of thengapalli3.
If any member fails to do so, he will be required to compensate for that day by two days of
patrolling and pay a fine of Rs 10.
3. On receiving information regarding theft in the forest, the palia (a person who has the
responsibility of protecting the forest) has to go to the forest. If he fails to do so, he will have
to pay a fine of Re 1 and apologize publicly.
4. A member can go into the forest for collection of material allotted to him only after paying
the money as per the scheduled rates to the concerned office bearer. Violation of this rule
results in a fine of Rs 2.
5. No one can sell the forest produce from the protected patch to any outsider.
6. If somebody requires more wood than he is entitled to, he will have to take permission of
the committee and pay thrice the scheduled rates.
7. If anyone wants to give his share to another person, he can do so at double the rate and
after taking the consent of the committee.
8. Forest produce can be collected only from the area allocated by the committee. If someone
collects from any other area, he would have to pay a fine of Rs 2. The same rule applies for
tree-felling.
9. It is mandatory for all members to attend the general body meeting. Absentees have to
pay a fine of Re. 1. If a person remains absent from three consecutive meetings, he will be
case studies - orissa

removed from the committee.

10. If someone does not pay the fine, he is excluded from forest benefits.
11. Material brought from the forest cannot be used unless checked by the committee.

The forests are protected through either thengapalli or through paid watchers. In some cases,
during the months of the kharif crop, the thengapalli practice is discontinued. The community
takes up important operations like cleaning and coppicing voluntarily, and the resulting material is
used for fuelwood as well as poles.
486 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Conflict resolution
A number of conflicts have been reported in this area. In Mahapada village, conflict arose due to
perception of unequal and favoured distribution of benefits to different castes. The non-Brahmins
alleged that the Brahmins were violating the rules and cutting trees, while not discharging their
forest protection responsibility. This conflict was resolved by dividing the forest patches among the
caste committees for management.
A major conflict and physical clash occurred between Kendupada and Atinda over the latter’s
protected forest patch. The residents of Kendupada tried to cut and take away the sal trees
which were protected by Atinda. This fight was resolved only after the intervention of government
officials and PIPAR.
In Vejibolua, two villagers felled some trees against the rules and challenged the authority of
the committee to punish them. At that juncture, the concerned police officer passed judgement in
favour of the committee.
It is seen that the forest officials also support this system of forest management, even though
it is not in keeping with the Indian Forest Act. In a number of cases, communities have resolved
conflicts through their own innovative approaches. In Joranda village, the inability to resolve a
conflict led to the cutting of a large patch of sal forest. Now this village has no forest left.

Impacts of community effort

Regeneration of forests has ameliorated the fuelwood situation in the villages. Earlier the
villagers would obtain fuelwood from the Kapilash Reserved Forest, which was time-consuming
and expensive as it had to be carried in carts, with the cost amounting to Rs 100-120. Now, except
in Bhatkateni and Barahota (which have smaller patches of forest and are still regenerating), the
villagers get ample fuelwood through cleaning of forest patches every year for a nominal cost of
Rs 2-5 per cartload.
Non-timber forest produce, including fruits like bel, aonla, and baheda, has significantly increased.
Tribals in particular have benefited from this as they often depend on collection of tubers, stems
and leaves of various plants from the forest for food, particularly in times of scarcity.
Regeneration has also led to increased employment opportunities. The tribals of Chattia village
get full employment for 45 days of the kendu leaf season and for 15 days of the sal season and
earn about Rs 15-20 per day. Opportunities for leaf plate making and chatai (mats) making also
provide tribal women and children employment for about six months.
Generally timber is not harvested but if needed for purposes such as construction of schools,
emergency house construction, etc. then it is available at a nominal price.
Forest management has also led to a certain degree of empowerment of the poor.

Opportunities and constraints

In most villages, harvested forest produce was being distributed equitably. Since there is no
restriction on collection of fuelwood (dry and fallen) by headloads and non-wood forest produce,
the poorer sections seem to have benefited more. Equity seems to be more in cases where patches
of forests are being managed by caste-based committees.
However, in areas where village committees are managing the forests, the higher castes are
often perceived to be gaining more, as they can afford to take cartloads of wood out as compared
to headloads by the poorer sections. This has sometimes caused tensions. In Mahapada, this has
resulted in the division of the common patch and management of separate patches by SCs and
STs.
During the time when community forest management was being taken up, the villages who
began protection first took over a large area of forest for management, while the other villages
were left with little or no area at all. These imbalances put pressure on the excluded groups and
in some places like Atinda and Kendupada, the villagers were not able to prevent outsiders from
coming and exploiting the forest. This pressure is bound to grow once the trees, mainly sal, become
older. In addition, Kapilash Reserved Forest, which is a source of timber and fuelwood to all the
villagers in the area, has recently been closed by the forest department. It is inevitable that those
people earlier dependent on Kapilash would now turn to Rupabalia. This is bound to significantly
increase the pressure on the protected forests. Pressure may also increase in areas where a large
 Orissa 487

population shares a small forest patch.

The major driving force behind community protection was the scarcity of forest produce. In the
event that such a scarcity arises once again, there will be great pressure exerted on the forest.
Pressure is also bound to grow when the sal trees mature, as the older these trees become, the
more expensive they get. This could put much pressure on the conserving community, considering
the lack of freely available timber and fuelwood in the market. A positive external intervention
may be needed in these areas; however, any government intervention unless well designed and
properly implemented may upset the fragile equilibrium within and among the villagers.

This case study has been compiled from: S. Kant, N. Singh and K. Singh, Community Based
Forest Management Systems –Case studies from Orissa (Bhubaneshwar, Vasundhara). We are
extremely grateful to Vasundhara, a Bhubaneshwar-based NGO, for their helpful contributions
and comments on the first draft.

For more details contact:

Vasundhara
Plot No. 15
Shahid Nagar, Bhubbneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674 2542011/12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

Endnotes
1
Project Corporate Consultants (PCC),‘Report on the Study on Enumeration of Forest Patches Protected by Villagers
in Orissa and Mechanism and Motivation behind such Protection’ (Bhubaneshwar, unpublished, 1990).
2
Patches of forests assigned to villages to meet their bonafide requirements.
3
In thengapalli, the household assigned the patrolling duties for the day is given the intimation by means of the
thenga (wooden stick) placed at its door on the prior evening. Subsequently, the thenga is passed from household to
household. The number of pallis (persons on duty) per day is determined by the village council depending upon the
forest area and the external pressure on the protected patch.

case studies - orissa

 CCA/Orissa/CS2/Ganjam/Mangalajodi/Species protection

Mangalajodi village (Chilika lake), Ganjam

Background
Chilika lake situated in the state of Orissa in India is a haven for birds both resident as well as
migratory. Interwoven in an intricate human-nature pattern, Chilika lake is the country’s largest
brackish waterbody. Every year lakhs of migratory waterfowl descend on these wetlands coming
from far-off countries.
Poaching of birds in the Chilika lake has been going on for hundreds of years. Different forms
of killing have been practiced, which include use of nets, traps, guns, poisoning, etc. The method
of poisoning employed in these wetlands has been responsible for maximum deaths. Poison is
placed inside the tubers/roots of a few varieties of aquatic plants, which form a regular diet of the
waterfowl. Upon feeding, thousands of birds die.
Although poaching is practiced in almost all villages around Chilika Lake, the extent of poaching
has been maximum is certain villages like Sorona, Mangalajodi, Bhusandpur, Kalupada, Chilikasahi,
Jatiapatna, Satpada, Sundarpur, Kumandala and others. Each of these villages is inhabited by 20
to 80 poachers, proficient in the use of various techniques which have been passed down the
generations. Birds are considered a major delicacy and a good quantity are consumed locally. The
bird meat is sold in the open market, at rates varying from Rs 20 to Rs 60 a piece, depending on
the species and method of kill. This income attracts many poachers. A proficient poacher could
earn anything between Rs 10,000 and Rs 40,000 in a year.
Chilika also harbours many waterbird breeding habitats, where many species of birds lay eggs.
Collection of bird eggs from areas such as Mangalajodi and Sundarpur for consumption and sale
in the open market was another major source of income for many villagers. The government
authorities were helpless in dealing with this situation because of the sentiments of the local
people as also high-level political patronage.

Towards community conservation

In the year 1996-7, an environment group called Wild Orissa was constituted by a number of
residents from around Chilika Lake. These residents were concerned about the incidents of bird
hunting and their impact on the bird population. Those who initiated and registered the group
hoped that involvement with the activities of this NGO would bring many others out of poaching
activities. The beginning was difficult but slowly Wild Orissa managed to involve persons who were
concerned about the birds. Slowly the group managed to get a toehold in Mangalajodi village,
sharing the villagers’ grief and happiness, solving their small day-to-day problems, and discussing
sundry matters with them for many hours and days.
In the early part of the year 2000, the then Divisional Forest Officer of Chilika Wildlife Division,
Anoop Kumar Nayak, invited Wild Orissa to involve its members in controlling poaching/hunting of
waterfowl in Chilika Lake. In this programme, the sarpanches (panchayat heads) of many villages
were involved. This cooperation of local village heads in controlling poaching continued for a few
months.
In December 2000, a bird protection committee, Sri Mahavir Pakhshi Surakshya Samiti, was
constituted in Mangalajodi. Consequently, from the winter season of 2000-01 till this case study
was written, there has been a drastic fall in poaching activities. This samiti involved some of the
case studies - orissa

leading poachers/hunters of the village, which has helped tremendously in curbing the poaching
of waterfowl, prevention of poaching of bird eggs for human consumption, etc. The members,
who once hunted birds, now participate in the activities of the NGO and undertake surveillance
and patrolling, on their own or in co-ordination with members of Wild Orissa and the state forest
department (FD) staff.
In 2001 the Chilika Development Authority (CDA) for the first time got involved in these bird
protection activities, and undertook a survey of the waterfowl breeding habitat in Mangalajodi
along with members of Wild Orissa and Sri Mahavir Pakhshi Suraksha Samiti.
Some of the activities of Wild Orissa and Sri Mahavir Pakhshi Suraksha Samiti include:
488
 Orissa 489

Wintering water fowl at Mangalajodi Photo: Ashish Kothari

1. Monitoring the lake, especially in the poaching-prone areas adjoining Mangalajodi.

2. Patrolling during odd hours against poaching of bird eggs.
3. Holding regular meetings of members of the bird protection committee of Mangalajodi.
4. Holding meetings with the forest staff of Tangi Wildlife Range and Mangalajodi Section.
5. Outings with visiting scientists from the Bombay Natural History Society to the breeding
habitats.
6. Involvement of school children in boat excursions to the bird-breeding habitats.
7. Organising competitions on Chilika Lake and its birds amongst school children of the area.
8. Seeking interventions of the chief wildlife warden, irrigation department, Chilika Development
Authority, etc., on the more fragile waterfowl breeding habitats.
9. Ensuring some income generation for the poachers-turned-conservationists, which could help
mitigate the poor economic conditions of these people, and ensure their continuous involvement
in waterfowl conservation.
case studies - orissa

Impacts of community effort

A unique initiative in involving one-time poachers to undertake wildlife conservation, Mangalajodi
has attracted the attention of many people from far and wide. This experiment at Mangalajodi
was recognized by the state government of Orissa when the Chief Minister of Orissa awarded
the Pakhshi Bandhu Award to the Sri Mahavir Pakshi Surakshya Samiti of Mangalajodi during the
wildlife week celebrations of 2001.
Wild Orissa helped in procuring small wooden boats, which are being utilised for patrols and
monitoring, as well as by two erstwhile poachers for income generation. This second facet is
worth noting, because, through only a small expenditure, these poachers-turned-conservationists
490 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

could use these small boats for monitoring the bird

breeding habitats as well as engage in fishing, which
provided them with a certain amount of income. As
per calculations, each such boat enabled a poacher
to earn Rs 25 worth of fish per day, which comes to
about Rs 9000 per year. This step therefore helped in
bird conservation/preservation and was also a small
step towards rehabilitating the people whose income
had been impacted because of giving up hunting. Wild
Orissa has also helped in attracting visitors to this area
to enhance the income of the villagers through eco-
tourism. Additionally, relatives of the members of the
bird protection committee have also been provided
employment opportunities outside Orissa since 2006.
Members of Wild Orissa and Mahavir Pakshi
Surakshya Samiti, Mangalajodi Memebers of Wild Orissa and the samiti are currently
Photo: Ashish Kothari involved in wildlife awareness and education in local
schools to sensitise children towards the birds that
visit Chilika Lake.
Mangalajodi villagers now attach great importance to conserving and preserving Chilika as a
waterfowl-breeding habitat. Along with the members of Wild Orissa, villagers have identified an
area, locally called Mangalajodi Ghera (an area of Chilika Lake of about 1.5 sq km adjacent to the
Mangalajodi village, and enclosed by the construction of an earthen embankment), as the area of
prime importance for protection. This area retains water for much of the year, and the protection
activities of the villagers has ensured that this site is safe for birds. Wild Orissa is helping the
villagers in negotiations with the state wildlife wing as well as the irrigation department, to ensure
that water after the rains is retained inside this closed embankment at least till the month of March
every year. Part of this area is used by the villagers for agriculture; however, the villagers have
resolved to use methods of agriculture that would not harm the birds.
The monitoring of this area has shown that in the dry months, the dried-up bed was being
profusely used by the Oriental pratincole, red-wattled lapwing, yellow-wattled lapwing, etc. to
breed; while during the monsoons months, the purple moorhen, Indian moorhen, bronzewinged
jacana, pheasant-tailed jacana, common coot, water cock, spotbill, large whistling teal, etc. laid
eggs in big numbers.
Participation in protection of birds and involvement with the local NGO has encouraged the local
villagers and has also lead to self-belief and self-esteem. The members of the bird protection
committee learnt the English names of the birds found in Chilika Lake. They already had immense
traditional knowledge about the birds, their habitat and habits. Their knowledge helped the
members of Wild Orissa in identifying some previously unknown nesting and breeding sites of
many uncommon birds that visit Chilika. This information has been shared with the state wildlife
department and the Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS). Information on the breeding habits of
the following species of birds was obtained through their help: little cormorant, Indian cormorant,
grey heron, purple heron, great egret, intermediate egret, little egret, cattle egret, heron, Indian
pond heron, cinnamom bittern, black bittern, yellow bittern, night heron, painted stork, Asian
openbill, lesser whistling teal, fulvous whistling teal, cotton pigmy goose, white-breasted waterhen
and brown crake.
These activities have attracted the attention of many government departments towards Chilika
Lake. Many government officials have visited Mangalajodi in recent times. Members of the bird
protection committee take the visitors around the area. Certain rules and regulations have been
laid down jointly by the protection committee and Wild Orissa to ensure that some areas remain
inviolate and the number of people visiting does not exceed a certain number, so as to avoid
excessive disturbance to the birds.

Support from outside

By participating in programmes like the IBAs in the year 2002 and the BNHS project for
conservation of Mangalajodi waterfowl breeding habitat, Wild Orissa has been able to procure
some funds for its own activities and supporting the activities of the bird protection committee.
Since 2001 the CDA has also been closely involved in the bird protection initiatives in the
Mangalajodi. CDA has financially assisted for continuing bird protection activities, including the
construction of a building at Mangalajodi for bird conservation and bird interpretation work. CDA
 Orissa 491

has also initiated dredging operations to deepen the channel connecting Mangalajodi with the main
Chilika Lake in order to enable easy movements of boats. Plantations have also been earmarked by
CDA at Mangalajodi. In 2006, as part of an Indo-Canadian Environment Project, CDA assisted Wild
Orissa in publishing an information brochure and organizing a boat rally on World Wetlands Day.

Opportunities and constraints

The following factors identified by Wild Orissa could be detrimental to the Mangalajodi wetland:
1. Increased human movements leading to disturbances to nest-building and nesting/rearing. The
bird protection committee is so far ensuring that these places are not overused by visitors.
2. Possibilities of causing disturbance while monitoring the nests and eggs, by boats or on foot,
especially inside the Mangalajodi Ghera area. Once the nesting birds get disturbed, they leave
the nest leaving the exposed eggs to the mercy of the crows (ravens). This problem could
be solved by minimizing the movements of boats/people inside the Ghera area to the bare
minimum level.
3. The increased population of crows is one major threat to the population of birds. The crow
menace is less seen in waters outside the Ghera, as crows probably do not find a suitable
perching place to poach.
4. Increased cattle movement as the dried lakebeds are browsed upon by buffaloes and goats,
which stamp upon the nests. The members of the bird protection committee have already been
successful in controlling this cattle movement to a small extent, after successful interventions
through the village panchayat.
5. Oil spills from motorboats. A number of boats are plied in these waters all the year round by
the villagers for fishing as well as transport. Care should be taken to ensure that when eco-
tourism takes place in a bigger manner, eco-friendly modes of transport should be resorted to.
The area is prone to ill-directed developmental activities like-well digging, artificial fish feeding,
etc., which would cause demise of this habitat. It is imperative that only such activities should
be encouraged which do not cause any harm to this fragile wetland.
6. The involvement of the local people, most importantly the poachers-turned-conservationists, in
all aspects of bird conservation is a must, as this would keep their involvement intact as well
as ensure them a say in decision making. But many members of the bird protection committee
have had to give up their major source of income. It is important that attention is paid that they
could earn some livelihood while protecting the birds. Wild Orissa has already addressed letters
to the authorities concerned for involving these persons in the eco-tourism projects, so that
they could earn a livelihood as well as monitor this bird habitat. It is important to understand
that without this the future of this wetland would be bleak.
7. Both Wild Orissa and the bird protection committee face a resource crunch to undertake many
activities like regular patrolling, awareness campaigns for the inhabitants of Mangalajodi and
nearby villages, etc. Many schemes and programmes are not able to take off due to this financial
crunch and lack of boats, binoculars, documentation equipment, etc.

Box 1
Eco-Tourism Project at Mangalajodi
An eco-tourism project has been started at village Mangalajodi since October 2002 for the
benefit of those involved in the conservation activities. An advertisement and write-up was
inserted in the daily newspapers. This project has already drawn a good response and since the
winter of 2002-3 about 500 people have annually visited this village and availed of the meagre
case studies - orissa

facilities offered. For the benefit of the tourists, the villagers have taken the following steps
with help from Wild Orissa and CDA:
1. In 2004 a bird interpretation centre has been constructed for visitors to Mangalajodi.
2. CDA, Directorate of Tourism Orissa, etc. have undertaken steps to impart eco-guide training
to about 50 persons from Mangalajodi and Sundarpur villages.
CDA has constructed watch-towers, nature trails, benches, jetty, etc. for visitors.
492 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Conclusion
Mangalajodi presents an excellent example of how local people, if taken into account, can turn
into the best protectors of an ecosystem and its non-human inhabitants. If convinced, they can
undertake conservation even at tremendous personal and economic costs. However, sustaining
any effort at a loss is unrealistic. It is therefore imperative that the members of Mangalajodi bird
protection committee are supported in their efforts through working out ecologically sensitive
livelihood options. As reported by Ashish Kothari of Kalpavriksh, ‘In the winter of 2005-6, two of
the ex-hunters rowed us through the marshes, proudly gave us the names of various brids (in
English and Oriya), and explained their motivation for protecting the birds. A part of it was ethical
(they had earlier sworn by the Chilika lake deity, Maa Kalijai, not to harm nature), a part of it was
pride in being able to harbour such a spectacular assemblage of birds, and a part was the hope that
visiting birdwatchers would bring some income their way.’ Mangalajodi’s villagers, Wild Orissa, and
the Orissa Forest Department are now trying to see if this initiative could spread to neighbouring
villages, which would help spread a ring of protection around Chilika.
It is also important that some legal protection is offered to this area. However the legal support
would need to take into account the fact that the Mangalajodi birds would not be safe but for the
efforts of the local villagers. In any decision that is taken about the area, the consent of the local
villagers is a must.

This case study has been compiled based on information provided by Nand Kishore Bhujbal of
Wild Orissa and Ashish Kothari of Kalpavriksh in November 2006.

For more details contact:

Nand Kishore Bhujbal
P.O. Tangi,
District Khurda, Orissa.
Ph: 09937153857

Surjit Bhujbal
Ph: 09868866433

Monalisa Bhujbal
Secretary, Wild Orissa,
BJ-29, BJB Nagar,
Bhubaneswar, Orissa.
Ph: 09873350058

Surya Sachi Swain

N3/89, IRC Village,
Bhubaneshwar, Orissa.
Ph: 09937020202
 CCA/Orissa/CS3/Ganjam/Rushikulya/Species conservation

Rushikulya rookery, Ganjam

Background
In the winter of 2005-06, one of us saw several hundred
thousand waterbirds and waders in the wetland around
Mangalajodi. Two of the ex-hunters who rowed us through
the marshes proudly gave us the names of the birds (in
English and Oriya), and explained their motivation for
protecting the birds. A part of it was ethical (they had
earlier sworn by the Chilika lake deity, Maa Kalijai, not to
harm nature), part was pride in being able to harbour such
a spectacular assemblage of birds, and a part was the
hope that visiting birdwatchers would bring some income
their way. Mangalajodi’s villagers, the NGO Wild Orissa,
and the Orissa Forest Department are now trying to see if
this initiative could spread to neighbouring villages, which Olive ridley turtles mating at sea
Photo: Ashish Kothari
would help spread a ring of protection around Chilika.
Rushikulya rookery is one of the examples where the community is playing crucial role in
conservation of Olive Ridley sea turtles. The Rushikulya sea turtle rookery came to the knowledge
of the scientific community in 1994, when the Wildlife Institute of India discovered this place as the
third largest rookery for Olive Ridley sea turtle nesting. The rookery is situated on the sand-pit of
Rushikulya estuary near Ganjam. The fisherfolk from Purunabandha, Palibandha, Gokhurkuda and
Nuagaon are entirely dependent on the estuary and the offshore waters for their livelihood.
Now Rushikulya is becoming famous due to effective conservation of Olive Ridley turtles by
communities, and the degradation of other two major turtle congregation areas—Devi and
Gahirmatha—where mass nesting is rarely taking place due to massive killing of turtles by illegal
fishing activities. Thus the people at Rushikulya play a vital role in protecting this globally threatened
species.

Box 1
Basic information on olive ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea)1
Olive Ridley are the smallest of the sea turtles, weighing about 50 kg, and measuring about 60-
70 cm. They are named after the olive colour of their heart-shaped shells. They nest between
November and April, when they must have access to undisturbed beaches where sand is deep
and loose above the high-tide line. Generally Ridleys prefer wide beaches and sandbars at
the river mouth. Their diet consists mainly of jellyfish, prawns, crabs, sea urchins, fish and
other creatures. They help in increasing shrimp catch by preying on jellyfish that eat shrimp
juveniles.
Turtles migrate several thousand kilometres from their feeding grounds to the nesting ground.
The males and females court and mate in the water off the breeding grounds. Olive Ridleys
start migrating during September, and start nesting during November. The nesting season
goes on up to March-April, and even up to May. The females come ashore to nest mostly at
night. They find a suitable nesting site, clear away the sand, and dig out a flask-shaped nest
with their hind flippers. The nest may be 2-3 ft deep, depending on the turtle’s size. Each
case studies - orissa

female lays 60-150 ping-pong-ball-sized eggs. The eggs are about 4 cm in diameter. Once the
turtle starts laying eggs, she goes into a ‘nesting trance’, and usually cannot be disturbed. After
laying the eggs, she uses her flippers to fill the nest with sand. She then throws sand around
the nest for camouflage, and returns to the sea. Olive Ridley nest 2-5 times (on average twice),
and the time span between each nesting ranges from 46-58 days. After the season is over, the
turtles migrate back to their feeding grounds until the next breeding season.
Hatchlings develop in the next 40-50 days, and generally hatch during the night to avoid
predators like birds, dogs, crab, etc., and scourging heat. Hatching at night also helps the
hatchlings to find the path towards the sea, as hatchlings select the brighter horizon on the
493
494 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

surface of sea due to reflection of the stars and move towards the sea. They enter the sea and
start swimming against the waves. During this process, the hatchlings get imprinted with the
earth’s geo-magnetic field, which helps them return to their ‘natal’ beach when it is time to
breed. The hatchlings’ growth to adulthood may take 15-20 years. Experts have estimated that
only one hatchling in a thousand survives to adulthood.

Status and threats

Though there are various natural enemies of Ridleys, like jackals (Canis aureus), kites, gulls,
crows, dogs, etc., there are also other menaces like predation upon turtle eggs and hatchlings and
other natural causes like delayed mass nesting, high waves, heavy rain, strong winds and erosion
of nesting beaches that destroy thousands of eggs each year. However, Olive Ridleys are now
endangered because of human activities like uncontrolled fishing and destructive developmental
activities along coastal areas. Ridleys are also a Schedule I species according to the Wildlife
Protection Act, 1972. Between 1960 and 1970 there was an organized trade of live turtles and their
eggs. This trade was brought to an end because of conscious efforts of the Wildlife Department
and the support of other related departments. In the mid-70s trade became more difficult due to
the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, whereby trade in live turtles and their body parts was made a
punishable offence. However the scenario now is different. The present causes of concern are:
• Marine fishing-related incidental mortality: Thousands of Olive Ridleys are washed ashore along
the Orissa coast every year, which is the single greatest cause for declining sea turtle population.
Orissa coast is becoming a mass graveyard of Ridleys, indicating that these fabulous guests of
Orissa migrate thousands of kilometres to die. Since the last 13 years, more than 1,27,000 turtles
have been found dead on the coast of Orissa and as per experts’ estimates 2,50,000 have been
washed out into the sea during this period. These deaths are attributed to illegal exploitative
fishing activities by trawls and gill-netters. Being air-breathing animals, the turtles are unable to
breathe under water. In most cases, turtles get trapped in trawler nets and drown to death. The
Turtle Excluder Device (TED) enables them to escape if they are trapped accidentally. But not a
single fishing trawler in Orissa uses TEDs, though they are legally bound to use them. Hundreds
of turtles get entangled in floating gill-nets laid by gill net fishing boats and die after a tough
struggle. There are incidents in which the death toll due to entanglement in a single gill-net is as
high as 1500. The illegal fishing in turtle congregation areas in the turtle season leads to massive
turtle mortality.
• Bright lights from buildings in villages, towns, roads, highways, lighthouses and houses along the
coast disorient the hatchlings, which lose their way: instead of entering the sea they go towards
the land and die.
• Plantations along the coastline destroy nesting beaches, especially casuarina (Casuarina
equistifolia) plantations raised by the forest department along the coast of Orissa to reduce the
impact of cyclones.
• Coastal pollution by industries and coastal cities.
• Various destructive activities like sand mining, coastal aquaculture, etc.
• Upcoming projects like oil refineries and port construction are posing a major threat by destroying
major nesting grounds of Olive Ridleys.

Towards community conservation

As described earlier, the Rushikulya rookery was
unknown to the scientific community before 1994.
Local people were knowledgeable about the nesting
of turtles, as about 50-60 per cent of the local
people are fishermen. Before 1970 local people ate
and traded turtle eggs. Local people however never
ate turtle meat. Turtle meat was transported to the
Kolkata market. After the implementation of the Wild
Life Protection Act (WLPA), 1972, it became very
difficult for people to transport live turtles and eggs,
as sea turtles are included in Schedule I of WLPA.
Signboard announcing community turtle Local people also consider turtles as a religious taboo,
conservation effort Photo: Ashish Kothari since the turtle is considered as one form (avatar) of
Lord Vishnu.
 Orissa 495

In 1990 some local youngsters got involved in

a study conducted by a researcher, Dr. Bivash
Pandave from Wildlife Institute of India (WII), and
were inspired to conserve turtles. They had begun to
campaign against use of turtle eggs, trade of eggs and
live turtles, and for provision of penalty for use and
trade of turtles in WLPA, 1972, among local people.
Owing to this awareness and religious beliefs, people
stopped consuming eggs and engaging in trade of
live turtles. Slowly they developed an attachment
to the turtles and started protecting them, their
nests and hatchlings. According to the Sarpanch of
Purunabandha, ‘People of Rushikulya became more
conscious after one particular incident which touched
everyone. A live female turtle was being transported Youth of Gokhurkunda and Purunabandha
villages involved in turtle conservation
to Kolkata by train from Rushikulya when the eggs Photo: Ashish Kothari
started dropping from the gravid female. People felt
sorry for torturing the sacred animal and slowly stopped consuming eggs of turtles and selling eggs
and live turtles. Now different NGOs and the Wildlife Wing also started to work with community, on
turtle conservation. In 1998, the Rushikulya Sea Turtle Protection Committee was registered by the
youth from Purunabandha village. The committee has 27 members, all boys from the village. The
committee has now established an interpretation centre with the help of funds donated by some well-
wishers. The group was also helped financially by a local NGO called Wild Orissa for some activities.
The members of the committee protect the beach and clean it before the hatching season.
After the committee’s recognition in 1994, the forest department has been conducting annual
counts of the nests. During the nesting and hatching period about 10-20 youth from the village
help the FD with protection of the nesting site. Even those who do not get paid by the department
often come forward voluntarily to help with turtle protection. The FD also appoints 3 guards during
the nesting period (November-March) from among the local youth. Once the eggs hatch, many
community members participate in the process of releasing the hatchlings into the sea.
As mentioned earlier, female turtles have to come on land to lay eggs, where they come in direct
contact with humans. Therefore in this phase of life, the turtles require protection. The people in
Rushikulya have already stopped consumption and trade of turtle eggs and live turtles. Furthermore
about 10-20 youths in each of the four villages (Purunabandha, Palibandha, Gokhurkuda and
Nuagaon) are involved with the Wildlife Department in the turtle census and protection during
nesting. Earlier this was done voluntarily by local groups; and now in return for this these youth
get a honorarium on a daily-wage basis.
For protection of nests, villagers avoid walking on the nesting beach during the hatching period
(March-April), so that the eggs are not damaged. At the time of hatching, villagers protect
hatchlings from their natural predators and collect disoriented hatchlings to immediately release
them in the sea. For this the people discovered a method in which a ‘zero’ net was used to fence
the mass nesting area; now the forest department is providing this net along the nesting beaches.
The disoriented hatchlings get aggregated on the edges of the net and are collected in the early
morning and released in the sea by the volunteer. In this process all the villagers, including women
and children, are actively involved in protecting hatchlings.
The community is not only involved in giving protection to turtles on land but is also taking
measures to avoid turtle deaths in the sea. Community members have been practicing different
norms for fishing during the turtle season, like the use of specific type of nets, types of fishing
boats used, assigning fishing zones, and so on. These norms have been developed over last few
years by the experts working on turtles along with the local fisherfolk. Ashoka Trust for Research
in Environment and Ecology (ATREE), an NGO based in Bangalore, has helped develop one model
for fishing in the turtle season in village Gokhurkuda. According to one local conservation activist,
case studies - orissa

the community, especially the fisherfolk community, has to pay the cost for turtle conservation, as
in the peak turtle season, turtles break traditional fishing nets, the costs of which are very high for
these marginalized people. At the time of nesting, female turtles congregate near the river mouth
(estuary region), where they get food and suitable conditions for 10-15 days.
This is a difficult period for the fishermen of Purunabandha, who fish exclusively in the mouth of
the river. Since turtles break fishing nets, fishermen have to stop fishing for the period of 10-15
days, which is a heavy loss for them. At the time of hatching too, hatchlings congregate in the river
mouth, which also affects local fishery activities. However fishermen are ready to accept this loss
in return for turtle conservation, which indicates a deep desire within the people to protect turtles.
496 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

This may be the reason why out of the three major Olive Ridley mass nesting sites in Orissa,
Rushikulya is the only one where mass nesting has occurred in the last four years.
Another reason for fishermen to be able to participate in the protection efforts is the fact that
the fishing rights of traditional fishermen are protected in this area. In other areas in Orissa,
traditional fisherfolk are under grave threat from the trawl fishing industry, which has depleted the
resources on which traditional fisherfolk depend. Due to the depth of the sea in this area, along
with the presence of INS Chilika (a naval base) close by, illegal trawling has been controlled here
to a certain extent. This gives the traditional fisherfolk a greater stake for conservation of turtles.

Impacts of community conservation

As explained earlier, Rushikulya rookery is becoming one of the vital sites for Olive Ridley
conservation. The protection given to this species at Rushikulya is therefore contributing immensely
towards the long-term survival of this endangered species.
However, one question remains: what is the community getting in return? Mr. Rao, secretary
of the Jiva Sanrakshk Samitee, Gokhurkuda, says that turtles feed upon jellyfish. Since jellyfish
feed upon shrimp and fish hatchlings, where there are turtles there are ample fish, and turtle
conservation is consequently beneficial to fisherfolk. Besides, the community has now developed
a symbolic relationship with the Ridleys, and the outside world relates their area to the turtles,
which they are proud of. Such pride is intensified by their village featuring on television, radio and
newspapers because of their efforts at turtle conservation.

Opportunities and constraints

Eco-tourism
Regular visits to the site by scientists and tourists, along with being featured on TV, has enthused
the village community to extend protection to the nesting turtles. They also see it as a major
opportunity and hope that this will create some local employment because of increased eco-
tourism to the site. However, they have so far not received much support on this from the FD,
which is officially in charge of the turtle conservation in the area. In fact, one big hotel worked out
a tourism programme for Rushikulya but kept the village and the villagers out of it. The package
included bringing the tourists to the site, showing them turtles and taking them back to the hotel,
without any financial or other benefits trickling to the community. This was vehemently opposed
by the local people and was consequently shelved by the hotel. Villagers are disappointed that
there have been no efforts so far to develop a similar plan with them by anyone, be it NGOs or
commercial set-ups. The FD prohibits local youth from entertaining tourists. They do not facilitate
any regulated eco-tourism programme in which the youth could take an active participation without
affecting the safety of the turtles.
Trawlers
One of the major threats to the turtles that come here to nest is the trawl fishing (as explained
in Box 1). Trawlers have resulted in the death of hundreds of turtles every year along the coast of
Orissa. Traditional fishing in this area ranges from simple boats to mechanized boats, but these
are known not to harm the turtles to the extent that the trawlers do. The Orissa Marine Fisheries
Regulation Act, 1982 (OMFRA), along with the Orissa Marine Fisheries Regulation Rules, 1983, sets
sustainable fishing standards, limiting both the number of mechanized fishing boats and the area
open to them for fishing. Non-mechanized traditional fishing boats are allowed to fish unrestricted.
No mechanized fishing is allowed within 5 km of the entire stretch of the Orissa coastline. Only
mechanized boats with a length less than 15m are allowed to fish the stretch from 5-15 km. All
mechanized boats above 15 m length are allowed to fish only beyond 20 km of the shoreline. The
use of TED is also mandatory under OMFRA. Additionally, in December 2000, the government of
Orissa also prohibited mechanized fishing within 20 km from the high-tide line along a 150-km
stretch from the mouth of the Jatadhar river to the mouth of the Devi river, and from the mouth
of Chilika lake to the mouth of the Rushikulya river. This ban is from 1 January to 31 May every
year. Local fishermen support this move, since, in addition to being a threat to the turtles, trawling
also impacts local fish catches. Despite all the laws, however, illegal trawling has not stopped and
continues to threaten the turtles, marine life and the livelihoods of the traditional fisherfolk.2
Depleting marine resources and the inability to control trawling has caused dissatisfaction among
the traditional fisherfolk, as they see trawlers continuing while they cannot fish in the turtle season
because of the fear of nets being torn. The loss of income to traditional fishermen has often meant
that they have turned to the illegal practice of casting zero-mesh nets along the beaches and river
 Orissa 497

mouths for shrimp seedlings. This results in further deaths of turtles, who cannot come out of
these nets.3
Lack of support from FD
A lack of support and difficult communication and interaction with the forest officials in charge
of turtle conservation is another major problem faced by the villagers. According to the local
youth, the FD has a tendency towards creating plantations along the coast. Such plantations are
detrimental for nesting sites, as dunes are required for nesting. Some plantations done in the
village Gokhurkuda have reduced the area available for nesting.
Youth also feel that the FD should involve the local youth more actively in the protection activity
and the funds thus saved could be used for the overall development of the village community.
But they claim that the FD, on the contrary, is late in doing what is mandated to it. For example,
nowadays the nesting beaches get very dirty, which the youth claim directly affects the temperature
required for hatching. The FD is supposed to clean the beaches, which they do not carry out in
time. The local youth then take an initiative to clean the beach but are not paid anything for this.
The greatest problem that the youth face is a lack of communication with the FD, a lack of any
forum that can be the interface between the people and the FD.

Conclusion
Considering that Rushikulya is now among the few safe nesting sites for the Olive Ridley,
government should make it a priority to start a dialogue forum with the local people and recognize,
facilitate and support their initiative at conservation. There is also a possibility of the area being
declared a Conservation Reserve under the Wildlife Amendment Act, 2003, which needs to be
explored. However the declaration should be done only after absolute consent of the local people
and after taking into account all their concerns.

This case study has been contributed by Smita Ranjane, Rabindranath Sahu and Neema Pathak
in December 2006 with the help of Vasundhara, Bhubaneshwar and the Rushikulya Sea Turtle
Protection Committee, Purunabandha, Ganjam, in April 2006.

For more details contact:

Rabindranath Sahu
Rushikulya Sea Turtle Protection Committee
At Purunabandha
Post Pallibandha
District Ganjam (Orissa) 761026
Tel: 06811-254148 (R), 09437204384 (mobile)
E-mail: turtle_rushikulya@yahoo.co.in, rabinranathsahu@patna.com

Smita Ranjane
Vasundhara
Plot no. 15
Shahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674-2542011/12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in
case studies - orissa

Endnotes
1
Source: B. Pandav, and B.C. Choudhury, 2000, Operation Kacchappa leaflet; leaflet of World Turtle Organization
intended for Olive Ridley Conservation awareness.
2
B. Wright, and B. Mohanty, ‘Operation Kachhapa: An NGO Initiative for Sea Turtle Conservation in Orissa’, in K.
Shankar, and B.C. Choudhury, (eds.), Marine Turtles of the Indian Subcontinent (UNDP and Wildlife Institute of India,
Dehradun, (2006).
3
(As above).
 CCA/Orissa/CS4/Jharsuguda/Jhargaon/Forest management

Jhargaon village, Jharsuguda

Background
Jhargaon is a large village which is on the border between Orissa and Madhya Pradesh. Forest
conservation is being practiced here for several decades now. According to the people the village
is more than 300 years old. It has two main hamlets: Jhargaon and Dayadera. Jhargaon hamlet is
further sub-divided into Kulitapada, Harijanpada and Gond Pada hamlets. Dayadera has four sub-
hamlets: Kulitapada, Khariapada, Gond Pada, and Bhuiyan Pada.
The protection efforts of the people go way back in time. They are said to have started when
the village itself was established. Despite internal differences between the two main hamlets, the
village has always stood together for the protection and the management of the forest.
The forests of this area were under the Zamindar till 1950. After the abolishment of the Zamindari
system,1 the forests were treated as an open access resource, which led to indiscriminate felling
of trees. Further destruction was caused by coupe-cutting (clear-felling of forests in patches) by
the forest department.
Jhargaon has 100 households and nine caste groups: kulita, goud, khariar, bhuinya, bhuinhar,
kondh, gond, harijan and brahmin. The major economic activities are agriculture, wage labour
and headloading. Kulitas are the largest landholders; they are also economically and numerically
dominant in the village. They are, however, not considered big farmers by many people, as they
manage to produce only for self-consumption and do not employ any regular labour. There are
only three landless families in the village. Few villages possess fields outside the village. Besides
the kulitas, the goudas, gonds, brahmins, bhuinyas and bhuinhars are dependent on agriculture
for sustenance. The harijans and the khariar people own less land. The latter depend on share-
cropping within the village and go for casual labour jobs in the neighbouring areas. Harijans are
mostly dependent on headloading. Barring two households, all are engaged in kendu leaf collection,
which is the major occupation of the women members of these families. Two Khariar families are
engaged in leaf-plate making throughout the year. People also collect mahua and char or charoli
seeds from the forest. Out-migration rarely occurs these days.

History of forest protection and management

This village was part of the Chandrapur (40 km from Jhargaon) Zamindari till 1950, when the
Zamindari system was abolished. Thakur Birendra Singh of Chandrapur controlled the village and
had allocated 159.60 acres of gochar (grazing) land to be used by the villagers. Proper use and
management of the gochar land over the years led to a good forest cover. Low human pressure
ensured that forests were dense and met all the local needs. Other forest areas surrounding the
village were reserved by the Zamindar (designated as protected reserved forest by the government
after abolishment of zamindari). Forest guards were appointed to look after the other zamindari
jungle.
Kulitas played a major role in the management of the forest allocated to the village. They
prevented people from cutting green trees, while ensuring access to all in the village. Underprivileged
communities like the Harijans and tribals were given special forest rights and concessions by the
Zamindar, and were exempted from giving gifts and free labour. While the Jhargaon villagers were
allowed to collect forest produce without permission, the neighbouring villagers had to take a
license from the Zamindar, under the supervision of the villagers from Jhargaon.
case studies - orissa

The rules for the management of the forests included:

1. Rs 3 for getting wood to make a plough.
2. A license was required to get wood or fuelwood from the forest.
3. No such license was required for the collection of NTFP.
4. In case of offences, the landless had to pay through their malgujari (free labour) while the rest
were asked to pay fines in cash.
5. Forest fires were controlled with the help of villagers who were compensated with a payment of
498
 Orissa 499

2 sers paddy (worth Rs 2–5) for half a day’s work.

6. Hunting was strictly restricted. Only the Zamindar hunted and was accompanied by villagers
beating drums to chase the wild animals.
Many of the elaborate management practices established during this time are in fact still in
existence.

Towards community conservation

With the abolishment of the Zamindari system, deterioration of the forest began. Soon after
these forests were taken over by the government, they turned into an open access regime with
no rules and regulations. Under major settlement in 1976, they were given the status of khesra
forest (meant to meet local needs). Relaxation in forest rules post-independence, withdrawal of
forest guards, urbanisation, etc. opened the forest to logging. Harijans made a shift from contract
labour to forest-based livelihoods. The khesra forest was indiscriminately exploited during this
period. It was during this period that the Kulitas motivated other caste groups to initiate collective
protection. In the meantime the government undertook forestry operations and timber felling
in the surrounding reserved forest, leading to major destruction. It became difficult to control
indiscriminate exploitation of the forest. By 1961, the forest was reduced to bushes.
For the first time, in 1970-1, sixty households, who were members of the forest protection
group at the time of the Zamindar, formalised the institution with the appointment of an executive
committee (EC) comprising eleven members. These members were selected from all castes (but
mostly from the Kulita caste) and no women were involved. The protection effort continued for
five years with an informal set of rules. The villagers paid one tambi (approximately 900 grams)
of rice to the paid watchers, which was contributed by all member households in the village. Every
member household was to get an equal share in the forest produce. This was the only formalized
rule. A fine between Rs 5 and Rs 15, depending upon the type of tree and the degree of offence,
was fixed.
Despite this protection effort the pressure from other villagers did not reduce. The offences were
in fact on the rise. The situation became worse when one of the members of the EC was found guilty.
This general dissatisfaction amongst the villagers led to the breakdown of the protection efforts.
The paid watchmen also failed to perform their duty and did not show any personal interest.
Subsequently a second attempt was made in 1981, and a new committee was formed by the
youths of the village. They started keeping rough written records, which were not systematic and
eventually got destroyed. The rules were:
1. The palli system was introduced, wherein a stick is kept in the evening at the doorstep of the
person who has to go patrolling the next day.
2. One person from each hamlet was to go for patrolling.
3. Every member who had a share in the forest produce would have to contribute towards palli.
4. In case a member could not go for palli, he would have to ask someone else to go or would be
fined a day’s wage.
5. A watcher could be excused from duty in case of any emergency.
6. Char collection was allowed for only two days in a year. The committee would decide which
these two days were to be and announce it a day before the collection.
7. Cutting of fruit and timber trees like sal, shishu, mahul, gamhar and char were strictly
prohibited.
8. Other species could be cut for wood and other purposes.
case studies - orissa

9. An individual found felling fruit trees would be penalized with an amount between Rs 50 and Rs
100. If the offender refused to abide by the ruling, then social pressure was applied.
10. For house repair, dry wood and bamboo was given, subject to the permission of the EC, which
would verify the need.
11. The products from the cleaning-up and thinning activities in the gochar plot were distributed to
all members irrespective of their economic status.
12. Since women were not allowed in patrolling, the households headed by women had to pay one
day’s wages for hiring labour during their patrolling turn. On not doing so, that household was
debarred from the share of forest produce.
500 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

In 1986, a more systematic attempt was made with the intervention of the forest department
(FD). The villagers were asked to maintain records more properly. In 1990 the forest department
made the existing EC into a forest protection committee (FPC). Some women were included at
the behest of the FD, but their participation remained token. The composition of the committee
changed after nine years. An eight-member advisory committee was formed and new rules were
added to the old ones to suit the prevalent situation. These included:
1. Patrolling members could not return with any fuelwood, only brush-sticks and leaves were
allowed.
2. An offender caught for the second time would be fined double the amount.
Much later, in May 1999, the committee declared a total restriction on collection of forest produce
from the Khesra forest. This decision was taken due to increased illegal cutting of trees. No
specific rules exist for grazing, except that cattle are not allowed into the forest area during the
regeneration of young bamboo shoots.
The formation of the VSS took place in 1994 under the joint forest management scheme of the
government and a micro-plan was prepared in 1996. In 1997, Jhargoan and its neighbouring
village in MP, Ektaal, decided to strengthen forest protection. They forged an agreement for the
reciprocal exchange of protection and punishment processes to check wood theft. According to the
agreement, the two villages help each other in catching the offenders and keep a watch on the
entire patch. The punishment is administered promptly irrespective of it being day or night. The
agreement goes to show the foresight of the villagers of Jhargaon, which has heavily contributed
to substantially reducing the threat to the patch protected by Jhargaon.

Impacts of community effort

Protection efforts brought back the biodiversity in the degraded forest. A wide variety of plant
species can now be seen in the forest; wild animals have also increased. There are many incidents
when sloth bears destroy the sugarcane fields. Wild boars and monkeys are now in plenty.
Villagers are facing great difficulty in growing crops because of the increase in wildlife. According
to the villagers, the regeneration of forests has brought back many medicinal plants that were lost
during degradation and the local vaidyas (traditional healers) are able to get raw material for their
practice. Sal leaves are also available throughout the year now, thus providing sufficient materials
for the two khariar households for leaf-plate making.
Though there is a long-standing conflict between Dayadera and Jhargoan hamlets, forest
protection has enabled them to build bridges and work together. They come together for patrolling,
apprehend and punish the culprits. Matters relating to forest management are decided together.
Thus the protection effort has strengthened the institution of the village community as a whole
and added to its cohesiveness.
One negative impact of this initiative has been on those people, especially women, who are
dependent on collection of bamboo and fuelwood for sale. Now they have to walk longer distances
to collect firewood. Due to increased forest protection and awareness, they have to face many
problems. They are also unable to get bamboo shoots either for self-consumption or sale. Khariars
and Harijans earned substantial income from the sale of kardi (bamboo shoots), which is not allowed
any longer, impacting their livelihoood. Although even those who have been negatively affected by
these bans feel that banning the sale of bamboo shoots is good for the forests, they do feel that
collection for self-consumption should be allowed. Now that the villages in the neighbouring state
of Madhya Pradesh (where they were collecting wood from after the ban) have also started forest
protection, they have to secretly bring wood from these areas. The pressure from the committee,
they say, increases when there are increased incidents of tree-felling.

Opportunities and constraints

Jhargaon was the first village in the entire Belhapad range where a VSS
was formed.
For the villagers, the formation of the VSS under JFM is a security
against the constant fear of this area being brought under mining.
They believe, and were apparently also told by the FD, that creation
of a VSS would protect against such threats.
On the other hand, a number of promises were made to the villagers
at the time of formation of the VSS and the micro-plan by the FD.
 Orissa 501

Among other things, they were promised:

1. A sum of Rs 60 lakhs, to be spent in the course of 7 years.
2. Construction of a community center .
3. A metalled village road to link up to the main road.
4. A reward of Rs 10,000 for those working well towards forest protection.
Thus the expectations of the villagers were raised but none of the promises were fulfilled. On one
occasion money was used to fund the picnic of the forest department personnel who had camped
in the village for preparing the micro-plan.
The villagers allege that the FD used to forge accounts and ask them to sign on false muster rolls.
The funds that came under the micro-plan were misappropriated by the FD, and people were kept
in the dark. The strictness of the protection did not receive any support from the FD, and in many
cases the offender was let off easily or a lighter deal cut. There was no transparency, and hence
the faith of the people in the community institution also declined. According to some villagers, the
feeling of belonging is also not the same. In any case, villagers also feel that making the micro-
plan has been a good step. It has resulted in the planned work getting completed in the first phase
of the planning period.
The role of women in protection and decision-making is minimal. The two members appointed
in the committee are mostly for name’s sake. Most of the times their husbands represent them
in meetings. The committee is not making any efforts to promote women’s involvement. The
institution has failed to create a suitable environment to foster the active participation of women.
According to forest rules, families contributing to the patrolling duty are entitled to a share in the
benefits, but any new member can also avail benefits by contributing either in cash or performing
extra patrolling duty to compensate with labour. The amount varies depending on the financial
position of the family. While the rules for benefit-sharing of the forest produce apply equally to
all individuals and families, this kind of arrangement regarding benefit-sharing can also be a
hurdle, when despite having an interest one is unable to perform extra patrolling or pay a heavy
compensatory amount.

Conclusion
It is not as if Jhargoan village never knew the importance of the forest. The villagers say that
they are protecting the forest to meet their day-to-day needs. But the forest department has sent
out wrong signals in terms of magnifying the benefits. If this trend continues, it is definitely going
to put sustenance at stake for such community institutions.

This case study has been compiled from information contained in N.M. Singh, R. Panigrahi, R.
Roy, C. Behra, and R. Dash, ‘Devolution of Forest Management: Creating spaces for community
action for forest management. A case study of Jhargaon village, Jharsuguda District, Orissa’
(Bhubaneshwar, Vasundhara, 2001).

For more details contact:

Vasundhara
Plot No. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674 2542011 or 12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in
case studies - orissa

Endnotes
1
Feudal system that existed in this area prior to the Independence of India.
 CCA/Orissa/CS5/Mayurbhanj/Budhikhamari/Forest protection

Budhikhamari village, Mayurbhanj

Background
The exploitation of the dense sal forests of Mayurbhanj began during British rule when the
British set up a railway station at the district headquarters Baripada in 1921. From 1952 to 1972,
Budhikhamari’s Reserved Forests were managed under the working plan system prescribing clear
felling. Commercial exploitation combined with continued fuelwood hacking and grazing constrained
the restoration and by 1980 the forest was badly degraded. The emergence of timber mills around
Baripada town created much of the pressure as it gave rise to illicit felling and timber smuggling.
By the late 1970s, forests around Budhikhamari were decimated. In 1975, the forest department
officially declared about 10,000 ha patch of forest land as nonexistent and the entire forest was
clear felled in no time. Ninety-five villages in the periphery of the forest lost their only source of
income.

Towards community conservation

There are two schools of thoughts about exactly how the forest protection began in Budhikhamari.
According to Mahapatra (1999) the initiative in the village started on its own in 1983 when, after
years of drought, a herbal medical practitioner proclaimed at a village gathering that the village
would not survive if the forest was not regenerated. Gorachand Mahato, the current President
of the Mayurbhanj Forest Protection Committee (FPC), and some of his friends took these words
seriously. He, along with three other friends, started making rounds of the 90 households in the
village to convince them to protect the forest. They realised that protection would not be an easy
task as the forest was huge, and that if they did protect the forests there would be many people
to destroy it.
Soon after this first step was taken, all extraction from the forest was banned. Villagers were
permitted only to take broken twigs and dead branches from the forest. Five to seven people
started patrolling the forest everyday, each armed with a stick (thenga). Each family in the village
supported the initiative by sending at least one family member for protection. A FPC was set up. Its
members travelled by bicycle and on foot to other villages surrounding the forest and persuaded
them to protect the same patch of forest. Within one year, 15 villages were protecting the forest.
The villagers of Dubhiya caught and fined some villagers smuggling timber from the regenerating
forest and the money collected gave birth to the institution called Purti Society, which now leads
the FPC activities in the village.1 In 1986, the Budhikhamari Joint Protection Party (BJPP), aided
by Range Officer K.C. Mishra and Gorachand Mahanto, was formed. By 1998, BJPP had grown to
include 95 villages and extended its protection to over 3,247 ha of forest.
On the other hand Poffenbueger (2000) states that the efforts for conservation date back to
1983 when the then Range Officer Mr. K.C. Mishra encouraged and supported the involvement
of the local villagers in the forest protection. He started approaching communities and spoke to
their leaders about severe shortages of fuelwood, fodder and other forest resources. Gorachand
Mahanto agreed with Mishra and he formed a FPC in his village. Slowly with the support of the
forest department other villages were also encouraged to form such committees. Villagers were
intiailly sceptical but slowly they understood the importance and benefits of forest protection. In
1986 an association of the FPC was formed. In 1987 a meeting of 50 villages was called, in which
many agreed to protect a 50 ha forest patch close to their village. They also agreed to select four
young men from the village for the protection. After seeing the results of protection, 15 more
case studies - orissa

villages joined the initiative in 1988. In the same year a multi-village mobile force was formed for
patrolling a greater area of the forests.
Whatever the origin, the protection efforts progressed gradually and eventually representatives
from participating villages formed an apex body called BJPP comprising the president and secretary
of each member FPC, with all the positions elected by the members. In 1999, a woman extension
worker was hired and has joined the executive committee. BJPP helps the member FCPs to resolve
the disputes and liaison with the FD and outside NGOs. It also oversees the multi-village mobile
squad for forest protection. The BJPP executive committee meets weekly; however, emergency
meetings may be held whenever needed. The finances for the FPC are derived from various sources.
502
 Orissa 503

These include fees, fines, permits for collection of the forest produce, etc. BJPP also received
rewards and grants, which take care of expenses.
BJPP is active in creating awareness among the villages. It often conducts
environmental marches and has provided a unified front through which villages can
deal with the forest department as well as the more powerful timber smugglers
and fuelwood middlemen.
Budhikhamari, therefore, appears to be a good example of the forest
department and the local community working actively together to protect,
conserve and manage forests.

Impacts of community effort

The villages that are involved in the protection of the forests have
benefited substantially. In first few years of protection, the availability of sal
and tendu leaves rose markedly. Seed production has been improving gradually. In 1992, 78 tons
of sal seeds were collected, generating an income of Rs 97,500. Similarly, production of karanj
seeds and mahua flowers has also increased. Prior to the protection, a number of villagers were
engaged in fuelwood collection and charcoal-making. Their livelihood was seriously impacted by
the protection activities. These villagers have now switched to collection of sabai grass for rope-
making as an alternative occupation.
According to the residents of Budikhamari village, the regenerating forests provide some kind of
employment to every villager. Villagers are also free to collect the NTFP. Besides, the agricultural
production seems to have increased because of the increased availability of water and increased
fertility of land due to reduced soil erosion. Availability of fodder and fuelwood is also much higher
than before. Thus the initiative has offered many opportunities as far as resource availability and
livelihood options are concerned.
No biodiversity assessments have been done to ascertain the quality of the forests although
visual impressions indicate a good regeneration.

Opportunities and constraints

• Future leadership is one of the main worries for the continuation of this effort. Gorachand Mahanto
is already a septuagenarian. Other local leaders in the area have not managed to draw the kind
of respect that Mahanto commands within the community.
• Forest patrolling responsibilities seem to affect the economically poor people much more than
the well-off families. Those heavily dependent on daily wages have to forego their days earning
while discharging forest protection duties; on the other hand well-off families can afford to send
someone not otherwise engaged in generating the households’ livelihoods.
• The forest staff keeps changing every few years. New staff members bring in new ideas and often
different from the previous officials. Since such initiatives rely largely on the personal relationship
between forest staff and villagers, the villagers find it difficult to cope with the changes.
• Those involved with the mobile protection team feel a need for equipment such as flashlights and
uniforms.

This case study has been compiled from the following three documents: M. Poffenberger, ‘The
Resurgence of Community Forest Management in Eastern India’, in D. Western, M.R. Wright,
and S.C. Strum, Natural Connections: Perspectives in Community Based Conservation (Inland
Press, 1994); M. Poffenberger, ‘Communities and Forest Management in South Asia, A regional
case studies - orissa

profile of the working group on community involvement in forest management (WG-CIFM)’

(World Conservation Union (IUCN) 2000); R. Mahapatra, ‘On the War Path’, Down To Earth,
Vol. 8, No. 9 September 30 1999.

Endnotes
1
R. Mahapatra, ‘On the War Path’, Down to Earth, Vol. 8, No.9 Sep 30, 1999.
 CCA/Orissa/CS6/Mayurbhanj/Ghusuria/Forest protection

Ghusuria village, Mayurbhanj

Background
Ghusuria village is located at a distance of 37 km from the headquarters of Mayurbhanj district
at Baripada in the Barasahi block of Orissa. The gram panchayat of this village is at Kochilakhunta,
about 3 km away here. Legally the forests around the village are reserved forests under the
jurisdiction of the forest department. The village hastribal communities like the Bhumija, Bhuyan
and Jogi Majhi, and non-tribals like Bindhani, graziers and peasants.
Before 1971 the forest near the village, known as Jagannathpur Reserved Forest, was very
dense. Eventually, deforestation started and the green cover was reduced. The whole forest was
turned into bushes and the villagers of Ghusuria and its neighbouring villagers started encroaching
on the land for cultivation. The villagers of Ghusuria realized the situation. They were concerned
about the encroachments in the area for agricultural purposes.

Towards community conservation

The conservation initiative began in 1973. Initially, the village formed an informal group, which
included one member from all households in the village, to discuss about and conserve the forests.
This group started meeting regularly, at least once a month or more, depending on the need of
the community.
Through these discussions the villagers realized that one of the major causes of forest degradation
was gradual encroachment of these forests. In 1975, the entire community decided to protect the
forest from encroachments and consciously try and keep a check on deforestation. Two respected
people in the village, Sunaram Singh and Gour Mohan Singh, initiated this process and took a lead
in implementing the decision of the village. The villagers decided to patrol the forest on a rotation
basis. Each day 10 persons patrolled the forest from morning till evening.
Gradually, the forest began to regenerate and encroachment stopped. Unauthorised felling of
trees, however, could not be stopped completely. The leaders in this process received support from
the FD in their conservation efforts. However, consistent negative interference of neighbouring
villages demoralized the villagers. After 12 years of strict protection, the conservation effort slowed
down. The people felt helpless as they could not check illicit felling. This slow phase continued for
another three years.
In 1992, Sunaram Singh took the lead again and boosted the morale of the villagers. This
time he tried to do it an organised manner, and the village constituted a village forest protection
committee, with a president and a secretary as office-bearers. The office-bearers were selected
unanimously by the entire village. This sincere effort has continued since then. The decisions related
to conservation and management of the forests are taken by the entire village. In 1997, with the
intervention of the NGO Mayurbhanj Swechhasevi Samukhya (MASS), a woman’s committee was
formed in the village.
In the year 1998, the Orissa Forest Department proposed this area for joint forest management.
The local range officer of Betnoti Range formed a committee called van samrakshyan samiti (VSS)
with representatives from the FD and the community. The rules and regulations formed by the
committee are applicable to all members and forest users. Any violations get documented in
a register and punishments are given to the offenders. The FD’s role is mainly supportive and
case studies - orissa

involves administrative and policing work. The villagers hand over offenders to the FD if conflicts
cannot be resolved among themselves.

Impacts of community effort

The conservation initiative has helped in the regeneration of many species in the ecosystem
which were endangered. Whether and how this initiative has affected the wild animals in the area
in not known.

504
 Orissa 505

One clear economic benefit to the local communities from this forest is the availability of non-
timber forest produce (NTFP). Sale of NTFP such as sal leaves, different kinds of mushrooms,
resins, etc. brings substantial income to the villagers.

Opportunities and constraints

Out of the 185 households of Ghursaria, only 145 households are involved in the initiative. The
villagers who are not involved are of a comparatively higher income group, educated and well
established in society. They use resources from the forest through their labourers, but don’t normally
contribute to the process either in cash or through labour. Hence the village is clearly divided into
two groups: the poor are conservationists and the rich are the non-contributing users.
Inhabitants from surrounding villages like Punasia, Junda, Belpal and Jalpada also collect
subsistence materials from these forests, but do not contribute towards forest protection activities.
The neighbouring villagers often encourage unauthorized felling and are the main buyers of
smuggled logs and poles.
According to the villagers, the Lodha community living in Punasia village contribute to the illegal
activities the most. Lodhas are entirely dependent on forests for their livelihood, and sale of logs,
poles and timber is their mainstay.1 Conservation activities directly impinge upon their livelihood
and hence they have consistently refused to take part in the conservation initiative.

This case study was contributed by Deepak Pani in the year 2000, when he was working
with the organization MASS (Mayurbhanj Swechhasevi Samukhya). He now works with Gram
Swaraj.

For more information contact:

Deepak Pani
Gram Swaraj, Govt. Girl’s High School Road,
P.O. Baripada,
Dist. Mayurbhanj 757001
Tel: 06792- 259565, 9437039565
Email: deepak_gramswaraj@hotmail.com

Endnotes
1
Editors’ notes: It is not very clear from available information how this effort has impacted the lodhas, as they are
the forest-dependent community and any kind of restriction would have a negative impact on their livelihood. It is
also not very clear whether any kind of compensation was offered in exchange for loss of livelihoods as a result of
conservation activities.
case studies - orissa
 CCA/Orissa/CS7/Mayurbhanj/Kalikasole/Joint forest management

Kalikasole village, Mayurbhanj

Background
Sunaposi forest is a patch of forest located in the Chandua block of Mayurbhanj District in Orissa.
This area comes under the Deuli Forest Range of Baripada Forest Division and has 11 villages
situated surrounding it. This 5-sq km spread of forest is the main source of subsistence use and
livelihood support of these villages and is legally classified as reserved forest. The ownership of
this forest lies with Orissa Forest Department. Kalikasole village, inhabited mainly by the Santhal
tribe, is the first village around this patch of forest where the conservation initiative began. The
village is located 24 km from of Baripada, the Mayurbhanj district headquarters, and 7 km from
the block headquarters, Chandua.

Towards community conservation

In 1979, there was a severe cyclone in Orissa. Powerful wind uprooted thousands of trees in
the Sunaposi Reserved Forest. The forest department gathered these trees and sold them in the
market. Taking the cue, the villagers illegally started cutting down living trees and soon the entire
forest was reduced to nothing.
During that time, NTFP still did not have a big market. Collection of sal seeds was not introduced
yet. The local tribals did collect some NTFP for self-consumption and sale in the local market.
Income from this sale sustained them for about 3-4 months a year. In the lean period, the forest
was an important source of food for them. These people were therefore severely hit by deforestation
in the area.
Two villagers, Makardhaj Marndi and Ranjan Murmu, took the lead for conservation of one
portion of Sunaposi forest adjacent to Kalikasole village. Six persons were selected to patrol the
forest on a rotation basis.
The villagers soon realised the difficulties of protecting one patch of the forest without the
cooperation of the neighbouring villages. They then initiated discussions with the neighbouring
villages. Over a period of time five other villages started conservation activities.
Subsequently, in 1983, joint forest management (JFM) was introduced in these villages and a
forest protection committee was officially constituted with the help of forest department for the
management and protection of the forest. The committee in its general body meeting decides all
rules and regulations, which every member is bound to follow.
The main community involved in protection are the Santhals, although the benefits are now
being shared by all. The forest department largely plays a supportive role.

Impacts of community effort

The forest has regenerated considerably since the protection started. The villagers now derive
substantial income from the forest. Besides meeting livelihood needs, they also extract food items
and medicinal plants from the forest.
case studies - orissa

Opportunities and constraints

Although decisions relating to the daily management of the forest lie with the committee members,
they are not consulted on policy-related matters, which are taken by the state government. The
communities do not get the opportunity to express their views on policy matters, and are not even
informed about the decisions taken unless they find out on their own or through the NGOs working
in the area.
Differences between the conserving communities and the user communities seem to be gradually
increasing, as is the inequity in relation to forest use and contribution to the conservation process
itself.
506
 Orissa 507

The major thrust on regeneration, development and harvesting of sal trees has led to the neglect
of other flora and fauna in this area. Recently, the villagers have decided to adopt systems of
management such that contribute to the conservation of all elements of biodiversity and also
contribute towards the adjoining wildlife sanctuary. The decision is too recent to assess its
implications and efficacy.

This case study was contributed by Deepak Pani in the year 2000, when he was working
with the organization MASS (Mayurbhanj Swechhasevi Samukhya). He now works with Gram
Swaraj.

For more details contact:

Deepak Pani
Secretary, Gram Swaraj,
Kamala Nehru Girls’ High School Road,
Ward No-16, Baripada,
Mayurbhanj, Orissa, 757001.
Tel:06792-259565,258511,09437039565(M)
Email: deepak_gramswaraj@hotmail.com

case studies - orissa

 CCA/Orissa/CS8/Mayurbhanj/Patharghara/Forest protection

Patharghara village, Mayurbhanj

Background
Patharghara village is located in Chandua block of Mayurbhanj district in Orissa.
This village is adjacent to a patch of forest legally classified as village forest and falling under the
jurisdiction of the revenue department.
The tribal communities residing in the village are mainly the santhal, bhuyan, dehuri (kharia)
and kudumi people. The village is divided into three hamlets and falls under Patihinja Panchayat.
Cultivation, daily wages and NTFP collection are among the main sources of income for this
village.
The villagers of Patharghara have traditional access to the surrounding forests. Besides collections
for subsistence, the villagers’ also use the forest for sericulture, which is a major source of income
for the villagers. Over the years, with unregulated usage of the forest, coupled with the loss of
forest cover in the neighbouring areas, much pressure was being exerted on this forest, and by
1986 the forest had already reduced to a few trees.

Towards community conservation

In 1986, the forest department conducted a thinning and coppicing exercise in the forest area.
After the thinning, the forest stood bare, and the villagers actually realized how little forest was
left in the area.
The village then decided to initiate conservation of the forest. Initially, the two members from
each hamlet were selected to patrol the area regularly. After some time this patrolling system
weakened. Villagers then decided to form a forest protection committee and started protection
with more enthusiasm.
The village forest protection committee was established in 1988 and a secretary and a president
were elected. The committee has been functioning well since then. One person from each family
is on the general body of the committee. This 66-member general body meets at regular intervals
and takes all decisions related to forest protection and management. All regulations and rules are
recorded by the committee in the Resolutions Register.
Decision-making is entirely male-dominated, while the involvement in protection varies from
hamlet to hamlet. Benefits of protection are shared with all villagers equally, though those more
dependent on the forest put in more effort towards protection. This creates slight inequity within
the community.

Impacts of community effort

The local community has benefited by the increase in income from NTFP and subsistence collection.
The forest continues to be used for sericulture. Fire protection measures have helped many species
to regenerate and enriched the ecosystem.
case studies - orissa

Opportunities and constraints

Equity in benefit-sharing has not been achieved among different communities. In order to bring
in gender equity, a women’s self-help group has recently been formed with help of an NGO. This
group is gradually beginning to take an active part in village meetings.

This case study was contributed by Deepak Pani in the year 2000, when he was working
with the organization MASS (Mayurbhanj Swechhasevi Samukhya). He now works with Gram
Swaraj.

508
 Orissa 509

For more details contact:

Deepak Pani
Secretary, Gram Swaraj,
Kamala Nehru Girls’ High School Road
Ward No. 16, Baripada
Mayurbhanj, Orissa 757001
Tel: 06792-259565/258511, 09437039565(M)
Email: deepak_gramswaraj@hotmail.com

case studies - orissa

 CCA/Orissa/CS9/Nayagarh/Binjgiri/Forest protection

Binjgiri hill, Nayagarh

Background
Binjgiri hill is located 14 km southeast of Nayagarh, a sub-divisional headquarter of Puri District
in Orissa State. The hill is surrounded by eight villages, including Kesharpur, Nagamundali, Binjgiri,
Puania, Angasingi, Badagorada and Sanagorada. The hill has a dry mixed deciduous forest, with
species like mahua, amla, babul, dhobein or passi, bael, purple orchid tree, tendu or kendu,
spinous kino tree and palash.
The total area of the hill is 360 ha. Prior to independence this area was a part of Nayagarh princely
state. After independence it has come under the jurisdiction of the state and has been ascribed
Protected Forests category, locally called khesra forest. The local people have rights for bonafide
use of wood, e.g., wood for agricultural implements and house construction, fuelwood, etc.
The population of these villages varies from 182 to 1281. Badagorada has the maximum human
population of 1281 and the minimum population of 182 is in Binjgiri. There is no tribal population
in these villages and in most villages the khandais community is in the majority and hence in a
dominant position. Puania and Sanagorada have a large scheduled caste population and there is
no clear dominant caste as such. The main occupation in all villages is cultivation with the majority
population consisting of small, marginal farmers and landless labourers.
The ecology, flora and fauna of the hill were virtually undisturbed until 1940. Older people
remember a number of streams flowing through the forests in the hill. The scenario however
changed after independence, when massive deforestation took place. By the late 60s, Binjgiri
did not have any forest left.1 The streams dried up and the surrounding villages that depended
upon these forests faced scarcity of fuelwood, water for irrigation and threat of loss of soil fertility
because of increased soil erosion.

Towards community conservation

In the 1970s Prof. Narayan Hazari from Kesharpur village, who was teaching in Utkal University,
started writing letters to the villagers of Kesharpur expressing a strong concern about the degraded
forests and urging them to act. Gradually this made an impact on a few of the perceptive villagers.
Mr. Joginath Sahu, the headmaster of the middle education (ME) school got involved and started
an environmental campaign.
As a result of this, the villagers of Kesharpur decided to protect a patch of Binjgiri in 1976. As
the regeneration came up, the threat of pilferage from the neighbouring villages around Binjgiri
increased. The villagers realized that in order to protect these forests they would have to involve
other neighbouring villagers in the protection activities.
The environmental awareness campaign, already initiated in the early 70s in other areas through
padayatras, slogans and meetings, was further strengthened and made action-oriented. This had
an impact on other villages on the periphery of Binjgiri Hills and resulted in seven other villages
also taking up forest protection.2
Before 1982, the protection was informally done. In 1982, a workshop was organised under
the auspices of the National Social Service (NSS) in three villages—Gamei, Nagamundali and
Kesharpur—which was attended by representatives from 22 villages of the area. At this workshop,
case studies - orissa

‘Brikshya O’ Jeevar Bandhu Parishad’ (BOJBP) (Friends of Trees and Living Beings), a voluntary
organisation consisting of members of these 22 villages, was formed. The leadership of this
organization was in the hands of Joginath Sahu, Udayanath Khatia (a marginal farmer, Kesharpur)
and Vishwanath (a schoolteacher). This led to the active management of Binjgiri hill by the eight
villages and fourteen other villages provided support by restraining themselves from exploitation
of the Binjgiri hill forest.

510
 Orissa 511

Brikshya O’ Jeevar Bandhu Parishad and village governance

Brikshya O’ Jeevar Bandhu Parishad (BOJBP) is an organization based on Gandhian philosophy
and uses Gandhian tools like padayatra, fasting and satyagraha for averting threats to the forests.
Villages that adhere to the BOJBP ideology follow an informal village governance system.3 The
structure of these informal village institutions is almost the same in all the villages. Each village
has a general body (GB), which consists of one member from each household in the village. The GB
then elects members of the village council, which consists of 5 to 10 members. The office bearers
of the council are president, secretary and treasurer, and are selected by the GB. The village
council members are not elected but selected by common consensus. The process of selection
of village council members is different in Kesharpur village. Here the villagers have evolved an
innovative system of annual elections to reduce the possibility of nepotism. In this system, there
are no candidates for any post. Villagers above the age of 18 years cast their vote by secret ballot
bearing the names of five persons on it. The five persons whose names occur the maximum times
are requested to become office-bearers.
Village council meetings are held regularly in all villages. The office-bearers do not hold the post
by tenure; instead they are removed from their post as and when the villagers lose faith in them.
Except Anasinghi and Binjgiri villages, none of the other villages maintain minutes of the meetings.
However, all councils maintain accounts and the details of expenditure and receipts are presented
to the GB at least once a year.

Management of common property resources by the village councils

The village councils have been traditionally managing the village schools, temples, village
common lands, ponds etc. as common resources. Village ponds are mainly used for bathing and
more significantly for pisciculture. The village council manages the pisciculture in the ponds and
pays fees to the panchayat (an administrative requirement for obtaining the rights to practice
pisciculture) from the village fund and arranges for seed collection, distribution and sale of fish.
Village common land is cultivated by the village council on a share-cropping basis. The council
selects the person for this purpose and the village share goes into the village fund. In some
villages, the village temple and its land are also managed by the village council. Councils in these
villages also organize village festivals.

Forest management
The eight villages protecting Binjgiri have only a rough idea about their respective portions in the
Binjgiri hills. There are no clear demarcation lines. They have framed a set of rules, defining the
rights and duties of villagers, which include:
1. The forest is to be protected by voluntary patrolling on rotational basis following the system of
thengapalli (stick rotation). In thengapalli, the household(s) assigned the patrolling duties for
the day is given the intimation of the same by the ‘thenga’ (wooden stick) placed at its door
on the prior evening. Subsequently, the thenga is passed from household to household. The
number of pallis (persons on duty) per day is determined by the village council, depending upon
the forest area and the external pressure on the protected patch.
2. It is mandatory that every household participates in thengapalli. In case of inability to go on
duty, mutual exchanges of duty or adjustments are allowed. Refraining from the duty without
informing or without adequate reason invites compensatory duty on two days instead of one.
3. No one is allowed to cut any tree from the forest without permission. In case of an emergency,
the village council can allow such permissions.
case studies - orissa

4. Dry twigs, fruits, seeds and flowers can be cut. Some shrubs specified by the village council can
be cut for fuelwood.
5. The area is closed for grazing until natural regeneration or plantation gets established. In some
villages, rotational grazing is practiced.
6. Nobody is allowed to enter the forest patch with an axe, except with prior permission of the
village council.
7. The villagers can collect the stones for construction from the forest area for bonafide use only.
8. In case of threat to forest from outsiders, every villager is to help the palli on duty.
512 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

9. The person who violates the rules is fined. The fine depends upon the village council. Normally
the offender is asked to apologize publicly.
During the initial years of protection, a few villages decided to disallow goat rearing. All the goats
in these villages were sold off. Village councils allowed goats to be kept only after some regeneration
took place. Thengapalli is generally discontinued where regeneration has been established, and
the system of community vigilance is followed in these areas. Even the villages that still practise
thengapalli discontinue during the agricultural season.
Kesharpur has another significant rule for the trees on the riverbank. It has been decided that
the farmers who own adjacent farmlands will look after these trees. When a tree matures, the
council takes the decision to fell the tree. The wood is then equally shared between the caretaker
and the village. The caretaker also has full rights over the fruits and flowers from these trees.
Conflicts within or between villages are mediated by BOJBP. This body tries to resolve these
differences through emotional appeals, tolerance and understanding. It discourages monetary fines
or coercion, and promotes local arbitration at community level instead of external intervention to
resolve conflicts.

Relationship with other organisations

Some forest officials express doubt about the success of such a management system. Various
forest officials have however cooperated with the villagers on various occasions. Social forestry
taken up by the FD on 44 ha of the hill has led to close interaction between the two. There has also
been interaction with other government officials, such as the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and District
Magistrate, who helped in stopping quarrying that was happening the forests. The National Social
Service (NSS) organisation has also played a vital role as an external facilitator. Plantations on
barren hill areas with the help of college students and environmental awareness campaigns formed
a major part of these NSS camps.

Impacts of community effort

Kesharpur has become extremely green with a large number of trees in the forest and the
village. Even small children can give detailed accounts of the trees they have planted. In this area,
there have also been cases of demands for seedlings in dowry and plantations of trees as a part of
death ceremonies instead of feeding Brahmins.
Forest protection and regeneration has become an end in itself instead of being merely the means
for economic gain or for fulfilling the needs for forest produce. Nobody in the villages speaks of
cutting of trees. Production of poles and timber which requires a longer gestation period seems to
be of less immediate relevance.
However importance has been given to the production of fuel, either in the form of fuelwood or
leaves and fodder. Since protection, the availability of both has increased. In Kesharpur, after the
goats were given up, a large number of babul trees came up, particularly on the foothills and banks
of ponds and river. This wood is now used for making agricultural implements, fencing and as fuel.
Availability of fuel sources like leaves and twigs has increased. Increase in the availability of non-
timber forest produce such as nuts and berries and their sale is now providing an additional income
to harijan (Scheduled Caste) women. In addition, many kinds of roots, leaves, tubers, bamboo
shoots, etc. are collected by the people for self-consumption.
With increase in vegetation, wild animals such as wild boar, sloth bear, black-naped hare,
macaques, reptiles like Indian rock Python and many kinds of birds have returned to the forests.
Other benefits from the protection include prevention of soil erosion, increase in soil fertility,
rise in water table and increase in rainfall. A number of streams that flow in Kesharpur now have
water much after the monsoons.

Opportunities and constraints

Equity Issues
All residents of the village have equal access to the forest and rights to
collect dried twigs, leaves, etc. are equal. But it has been observed that it is
the poorer sections that mainly practice gathering, which is a time-consuming
 Orissa 513

process. The rich generally have trees on their farmland and sufficient agricultural residue as fuel,
or else they purchase fuelwood. Thus it seems that the increase in NTFP and fuel materials of the
forest benefit the poorer sections more, whereas the richer persons have benefited by way of
better agricultural yields.
In thengapalli, it has been observed that the poorer sections suffer more, since due to their
turn at patrolling they have to fore-go one day of labour, which would mean going hungry on
that particular day. The richer sections often send one of their hired labourers when their turn at
thengapalli comes.
The issue of equity also arises in terms of inter-village distribution: the area managed by the
villages is not in proportion to their population and other villages which are at the same distance
from Binjgiri as the protecting villages do not get a share of its produce. In such cases, even when
there is no equity the tradition survives.

Leadership issues
At present the people have faith in the BOJBP and the general feeling is that the organization is
working for the common interest. Loss of faith in this institution may lead to the crumbling of the
system.
Another factor, which may affect the sustainability, is the possible non-availability of the credibility
and devotion of leaders like Mr. Joginath Sahu in future. The organization may not be able to
survive without strong leadership.

This case study has been compiled from: S. Kant, N. Singh and K. Singh (1991) Community
Based Forest Management Systems- Case studies form Orissa (Bhubaneshwar, Vasundhara).
We are extremely grateful to Vasundhara, an NGO based in Bhubaneshwar, for the helpful
contribution and comments on the first draft.

For more information contact:

Vasundhara
Plot No. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar – 751007
Ph: 0674 2542011 or 12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

Endnotes
1
The reasons for such massive degradation after independence are not very clear. However, it is possible that it
happened after abolition of the landlord system in India in the 1950s, when the forests under the Princely States
became open-access forests because of the estate losing authority over these forests and villagers not having any
authority over them.
2
Meanwhile other hills, like Malati near the village Manapur, were also protected and plantations were undertaken
in other villages.
3
The village governance system appears to be working along with the official Panchayati Raj system in these villages.
However, the exact working relationship of these village institutions with that of the panchayat is not very clear from
the existing information.
case studies - orissa
 CCA/Orissa/CS10/Nayagarh/Dengajhari/Forest protection

Dengajhari village, Nayagarh

Background
Dengajhari village is situated in Nayagarh district of Orissa. The forests of Nayagarh were once
dense, but they were plundered due to the setting-up of heavy industries and the pressure on the
forest resources due to population explosion. The road from Bhubaneshwar to Ranapur in Nayagarh
district bears testimony to Orissa’s desperate efforts to join the list of so-called ‘developed’ states.
The road winds along barren and quarried hillocks, trees either felled or covered in dust and
struggling to breathe. Burning bhattis (brick kilns) line the road to some of Orissa’s well-protected
forests. It is not long however, before the barren hillocks begin to give way to green ones, some
lush with thick standing forests, others not quite there but definitely on their way. Ranapur range
is known for two completely conflicting traits: on the one hand, hundreds of households derive
their income from sale of illegally collected timber from the forests, and on the other, hundreds of
villages successfully regenerate once-barren lands or protect still-standing natural forests.
The story of the people’s conservation movement in Ranapur began sometime in the mid-1970s.
More and more forests were crumbling under smuggling of timber, heavy industrialisation and
increasing biomass requirements of the local people. Sources of water were drying up, women had
to walk as far as 12 km daily to collect firewood for their hearths, and villagers began migrating for
employment. Faced with an impending ecological disaster, many villages in Ranapur initiated forest
protection and regulated use of resources within and around their villages. By 1990s, almost all the
forests in the area were under protection by one village or another. There were few open-access
forests left, leading to consequent clashes between the protecting communities and the illegal
users. The need for a conflict resolution body and a support structure to fight against external
pressures resulted in an organic grouping together of neighbouring villages into small clusters.
Gradually, facilitated by some NGOs, including Vasundhara, various clusters came together to form
a parishad (federation). Today, Maa Maninag Jungle Surakhya Parisad (MMJSP) stands strong as
a composite body of 190 member villages. The federation helps villages with forest-related inter-
village conflicts; interface with the forest department, other government agencies, NGOs and
politicians; struggles against strong external pressures; and assessment of the ecological status of
the protected forests. For example recently, Adivasi and Dalit women of the area have pressured
the federation into taking up with the state government their demand for opening kendu (bidi
patta phadis). Together these villages are conserving a contiguous patch stretching over many hill
ranges. No assessment has so far been made of the actual area under such protection.
The villages that constitute the federation vary in their character and composition, some being
multi-caste, while others are predominantly occupied by a single tribe. Some were once completely
dependent on timber smuggling;, some still remain so, while others have now gone on to other
sources of income. Yet their stories are similar. Stories of forest destruction, realisation of the loss,
community mobilisation and, finally, success—in some cases in the face of life-threatening clashes
with the timber mafia.

Towards community conservation

Dengajhari is one village where the able support and intervention of the federation resulted in
successfully thwarting external pressures. With that emerged a unique and powerful initiative
by the women to become the caretakers of their forests. Dengajhari consists of 30 households
dominated by the Kand tribe. The success that women here have achieved in regenerating and
case studies - orissa

protecting their forests has come after a long struggle.

Like in the rest of Ranapur block, the once well-forested hillocks around Dengajhari had become
barren by the mid-1970s. For local villagers, degraded forests meant walking much longer distances
to meet their requirements and constant harassment by other villagers and the forest department.
It was then that the villagers decided to regenerate and protect their forests. Two neighbouring
villages, Lonisai and Madakot, joined in the effort. The three villages organised regular patrols
to the forests and their efforts paid off as the forests started regenerating well. This lasted for
about a decade, after which internal conflicts resulted in the breach of trust amongst the three
villages. Each village then decided to protect its own forests independent of the others. Lonisai
514
 Orissa 515

Members of all-women’s forest protection committee

Photo: Neema Pathak
and Madakot, being politically stronger and larger in size, could sustain their protection efforts.
However pressure started mounting on Dengajhari, which was a small and politically weak village.
Patrolling parties, all men, began to face serious threats from the timber mafia and villagers were
demotivated and discouraged. Additionally, time spent on patrolling started affecting the daily
wages and to compensate for the loss men were often compelled to fell a tree.
In the meantime Ranapur Federation, with the help of an NGO named Vasundhara, started
convening monthly meetings of the women from the member villages. The objective was to elicit
better participation of women in the decisions related to forest protection. Women from Dengajhari
regularly participated in such meetings. It was in one such monthly women’s meeting in 1999 that
women from Dengajhari expressed their disappointment at the situation in their village. They were
also concerned for the safety of their men involved with forest protection. After some deliberations,
the women decided to take on the responsibility of forest protection. Around the same time, on
26 October 1999, 200 people with 70 carts were seen entering the forest. The village men rushed
to the forest department but received no help from them. All the village women gathered at the
village temple, divided themselves into two groups, waited at the paths leading to the forest and
besieged the offenders with spades and sharp weapons. The offenders, all men, were scared of
retaliating because of social reasons. They feared that they could get charged with violence against
women—that too, tribal women—which was legally a serious offence! The men ran off. Women
then sent for members of the federation and forest officials. The felled timber was confiscated and
sold by the villagers, and the money was deposited in the village fund.
After this incident, women started patrolling the forests regularly. Maa Ghodadei Mahila Samiti, a
committee consisting exclusively of women, was constituted with help from Vasundhara. Although
all meetings about village protection are open to all villagers, women are the main decision-makers.
In a state like Orissa, where women’s participation in decision-making is negligible, Dengajhari is
among the few villages where even the monthly general body meetings of the Ranapur Federation
are attended by women. The Federation has been a constant source of support and inspiration for
these women.
The women have adopted the thengapalli practice for forest vigilance. Every day four women
patrol the forest and by the evening the thengas or batons are placed in front of the houses that
should take over patrolling the next day. The women’s committee has also laid down certain
rules for collection of forest resources. The small population of the village, which makes for a
case studies - orissa

high amount of transparency and visibility of each other’s activities, ensures that people abide
by the rules. Timber is extracted only when it is required for agricultural or building purposes.
A few other forest products such as date palm leaves, bamboo, etc. are extracted for crafting
small articles, such as baskets, mats, grain stores, and so on. Commercial extraction of timber
is strictly prohibited. For fuelwood, villagers are allowed to collect dry and fallen wood only. Poor
families dependent on firewood sale for survival are also allowed to collect dry, fallen wood for
sale. Hunting is strictly forbidden.
The Dengajhari women realised that the timber mafia often operates through local people
of other villages. Therefore, those caught felling wood are tied to a tree in the village, and the
president and secretary of their respective forest protection committee (considering that most
516 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

villages have one) are called to bail them out. Fines for stealing wood often depend on who the
offender is. For examples, habitual offenders are charged much more than someone caught the
first time; poorer offenders are let off with smaller fines.

Impacts of community effort

As a result of the protection by the villagers, the forests have regenerated and fulfil all the biomass
requirements of the villagers. Dengajhari itself protected about 80 ha of lush green forest and,
if seen in association with protected forests of adjoining villages, the green patch is considerably
larger, and possibly contains significant wildlife populations. Villagers report leopard, sloth bear,
mouse deer, even Asian wild buffalo (which needs to be confirmed), and a rich bird and insect
life. In fact the villagers proudly claim that they now have elephants in their forests. It is indeed
possible that the regeneration of the entire Ranapur range by hundreds of villages has created a
corridor for species like the Indian Elephant to re-establish their migration, though it would require
a scientific study to establish this.
The regeneration of forests has had many other non-tangible benefits, such as securing catchments
for the water sources in the village. Probably among the greatest benefits has been the surging
confidence among the women. This confidence is evident in the eyes of the women when they are
recounting their experiences to the visitors. This confidence is infectious too: women from many
smaller villages in the range, facing similar problems as Dengajhari did, are now in the process of
organising themselves for forest protection.

Conclusions
Much can be learnt from an assessment of what has driven these villages to start a conservation
movement and move towards a district-level federation without much external input, or how
women can be empowered enough to take on the threats that men cannot. These community
initiatives can be supported by helping the villagers assess the biodiversity value of their protected
forests. A range-level mapping exercise could also help in understanding the extent of area
under such conservation and its value as an effective corridor for larger species like elephants.
Strong encouragement would also come from recognising their efforts and ensuring a long-term
custodianship over the forests that they are conserving, and generating innovative livelihood
options.

This case study has been compiled by Neema Pathak, based on a field trip to Dengajhari by
Neema Pathak, Ashish Kothari and Tasneem Balasinorwala of Kalpavriksh in January 2005.
Prashant Mohanty of Vasundhara, Tasneem Balasinorwala of Kalpavriksh and Kundan Kumar
from Orissa provided inputs for writing this case study. Information was also taken from
Satyasunderam Barik, ‘Woman Power’, Down to Earth Vol. 10 No. 21, 31 March 2002.

For more information contact:

Vasundhara
Plot No. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar – 751007
Ph: 0674 2542011 or 12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in
 CCA/Orissa/CS11/Nayagarh/Dhani Panch/Forest protection

Dhani Panch mouza, Nayagarh

Background
Dhani Panch Mouza Jungle Surakshya Samiti is a case of collective forest management system,
where five villages have come together to manage a forest as a common resource. The Dhani
forest protection effort is one of the several thousand similar forest protection and conservation
initiatives by communities in Orissa. Many forest-dependent communities have responded to the
process of forest degradation by evolving local arrangements to conserve and manage forests.
These local arrangements seek to regulate access and control over neighbouring forest patches
and in effect bring open-access forests under the common property regime (CPR) regime of the
communities.
Dhani forest is located in the Ranpur block of Nayagarh district in the south of Orissa. It is situated
at a distance of 73 km from the capital city Bhubaneswar. It is a large tract of reserved forest having
mixed dry deciduous type of forest vegetation. Dhani forest has an area of about 2200 hectares,
out of which 839.75 hectares is being protected by a group of five villages since 1987. The five
villages (Barapalli, Arjunpur, Kiyapalla, Balarampur and Panasdihi) have formed a joint forest
protection and management committee called the Dhani Panch Mouja Jungle Surakshya Samiti.
The population of these villages consists of Brahmins, Khandayats, Harijans and tribals. The tribes
include Saoras and Kandhas, who are forest-dependent communities. The Brahmin and Khandayat
(farming community) castes are the influential people. Of the five villages, Kiyapalla and Panaspur
are purely tribal settlements. The village Balarampur has a significant tribal and Scheduled Caste
population, while in Barapalli and Arjunpur the dominant caste is the Khandayats.
Dhani Reserved Forest was historically part of Ranpur gadajat (Princely State), which had a
semi-independent status during native Hindu rule and in the subsequent British period. Under
British influence, Ranpur estate also initially categorized its forests into two formal forest tenures:
Reserved forest (RF) and village forest. RFs were further categorised into A class reserves and B
class reserves. In A class reserves, people had no rights, but there were special considerations for
the poor in the estate and they were allowed to collect fruits, roots and fibres for their own use
without any payment. The B class reserved forests were used to meet the needs of the tenants,
from which people got timber of reserved species at half the schedule rates and that of unreserved
species at one-fourth of the rates for bonafide purposes. The second major category was the Khesra
Forests or the Village Forests, which was differently known in different localities. Till 1918, the
forests of Ranpur estate were under the Police Department. In 1918, after the forest department
was established in the estate, the forests came under the forest department. Within the Khesra
forests the tenants were allowed to collect bamboo and timber for agricultural implements and
house repairs by obtaining permits from the king. Certain species could be taken freely from the
Khesra Forests for their domestic/agricultural needs. At times people were allowed to collect their
forestry requirements free of cost in lieu of bethi and begari.1 Every year the king issued permits
for a period of one month for collection of timber etc. for bonafide purposes. The Kandha and Saora
tribes of this area enjoyed special concessions on use of various NTFPs for own use. Yet, Ranpur
estate had strict rules and regulations, which prevented the people from exploiting the resource
with full freedom. Offences such as collecting unripe fruits or hunting of wild animals were strictly
dealt with. More than thirty tree species were declared as reserved, which were reduced to nine
in the early 1940s. People were not allowed to cut these species without permission; they could
however be cut for self-consumption on obtaining permission. People were free to collect fruits and
flowers of the declared reserved trees without permission except for mango, jackfruit, tamarind,
case studies - orissa

kamlagundi, kochil, harida, bahada and aonla. But there existed strict restrictions on selling or
exporting trees without a permit.
During the royal period, the forest was abundant and local people did not face any scarcity of
forest produce despite strict restrictions on access to the forest. After Independence, as the estate
was taken over by the Indian government, pressure on forests for forest produce as well as on
forest land for conversion to agricultural land began mounting. In the late 1950s the FD also gave
permits to the local contractors to harvest timber. The local people also accelerated tree felling in a
rush to get some wood/money while they could. By the mid-60s most of the low-lying forest areas
were completely devoid of large trees. The forest department took up a teak (Tectona grandis)
plantation in the area harvested by the contractors. This teak plantation as also Dhani Reserved
517
518 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Forests had completely degraded by 1980. Apart from the above-mentioned reasons, disinterest
of the forest department, rapid urbanisation in the nearby areas, illicit smuggling of timber and the
extraction of rootstock contributed to this degradation.

Towards community conservation

Degradation of the forests seriously impacted the villagers. People had to traverse long distances
to collect fuelwood and timber. A variety of food items such as fruits, tubers and leafy vegetables
that supplemented food, especially during the lean season, disappeared gradually. The impact of
drought and crop failure became more acute in the absence of the life-sustaining food-flow from
forests. Forest degradation had other implications too. The stream originating from Dhani started
disappearing. Soil erosion in the upper reaches of the hills affected soil fertility in neighbouring
fields. Out-migration of people in search of work intensified. Droughts became frequent, which
brought in the feeling that forest degradation was one of the main reasons for such recurrence.
Villagers realised that forest degradation affected them the most, and hence the initiative to
reverse the trend of forest degradation would have to come from them. Since the above-mentioned
five villages shared traditional socio-cultural ties and were dependent on the forest, they decided
to join forces to protect the forests. In successive combined meetings between these five villages
(facilitated by some notable individuals) during 1985-7, a decision was taken for joint protection
of the Dhani South Reserved Forest. A set of rules and regulations were framed to ensure smooth
management of forest protection, the umbrella rule being that ‘the entire forest area is declared
restricted and nothing is allowed free from the forest.’ Initially, a lot of effort had to be put to
contain the pressure on forest from the other villages. Five persons from each village formed
squads for patrolling the forest. As the pressure on the forest reduced, the number decreased to
two persons per village.
Formalisation of forest protection and management happened on 10 September 1987 with
the formation of a forest protection committee, named as Dhani Panch Mouja Jungle Surakshya
Committee. The committee discussed extensively the various problems relating to forest, their
causative factors, and ways to tackle these. The committee identified taila cultivation,2 rootstock
extraction, heavy grazing and fuelwood extraction as sources of heavy pressure on the forests. A
process of negotiation was initiated with the taila cultivators, and the committee gradually convinced
them to stop cultivation. Similarly, notices were issued to all villages in the area intimating them
about forest protection. Strict rules were laid down for dealing with the pressures. The committee
apprehended the offenders and imposed fines on them. In the initial days of protection, conflicts
were rather frequent. Even though there was significant external pressure prior to forest protection,
the patrolling arrangements kept forest offences under check.
In 1991, there was a sudden rise in the number of offences. This coincided with the regeneration
of the forests and the fact that the protection arrangements were beginning to become lax since
the poor and landless sections found it difficult to spend the entire day in the forest at the cost
of their daily wages. Other than the outsiders who were illegally accessing the forests, villagers
of Panch Mouja were also getting restless and wanted some product flow from the forests. With
the regeneration of the forests there was no corresponding change in the rules, and the initial
expectation of people that forest protection would fulfil their needs was not met. This led residents
of Panch Mouja to get involved in breaking rules and become offenders in their own forests.
Due to this pressure and the growing resentment of the villagers, the committee was forced
to accede to changes in the forest rules. They modified the rules to include annual cleaning and
thinning operations before the rainy season, thus ensuring a steady supply of fuelwood to the
villagers. However, felling of green trees for fuelwood was not allowed. The cleaning material was
to be shared equally among all the households of the five villages. Collection of dry and fallen
twigs and branches, leaves, fruits, climbers, berries and tubers was allowed without any cost or
permission. Tribals and Harijans were allowed to collect dry, fallen twigs and branches and siali
(Bauhinia vahlii) leaves to earn their livelihood. Poles for household construction could be obtained
with a nominal fee and permission from the committee. The villagers were allowed to take 100
poles of bamboo at Rs 30 for their needs. But this bamboo could not be sold or bartered outside.
The villagers could take wood for cremation purposes free of cost and without prior permission of
the committee. Similarly the neighbouring villages could get bamboo and timber from the forest
only after seeking permission of the committee and paying a certain amount. Special concessions
are made when the material is needed for community festivals if a particular village does not
have any forests, and in case of individuals who require wood for repairing their houses after
instances of fire or accidents. The committees also appointed two paid watchers on the condition
that the villages would provide all the help possible. They were initially paid through household
 Orissa 519

contributions, but with the increase in income through cashew harvesting rights, the system of
household contributions was discontinued.
While dealing with offenders, the Panch Mouza Committee decided on appropriate action
depending on the nature and gravity of the offence. During the initial years of forest protection,
no major decision regarding forest offences could be taken by the committee. However, with the
growing number of offences, imposition of fine became a standard penalty. The fine amounts varied
depending on the value of timber species. Fines imposed on offences were highest during 1991.
This also marked the beginning of referring cases to the forest department. It was noticed that
with the increase in actions on offences the number of offences dropped in subsequent years.

Addressing livelihood and development needs

The committee made several efforts to develop alternate sources of income for the headloaders.
The committee, with support from the forest department, arranged for leaf-plate stitching machines
and provided training to women’s group for processing of siali leaves. Some of the forest-dependent
households are now dependent on the milk business because of the schemes brought in with help
from government agencies. A few other forest dependent households were allotted small patches
of degraded forest land by the committee, which they have brought under grass cultivation. Grass
from the fields is supplied to the dairy project, thus benefiting the cultivators. A school has been
set up by the villagers through the forest protection initiative. Regular environmental awareness
building activities are taken up through celebration of Environment Day, van mahotsav (forest
festival), etc. Renovation work of a dilapidated pond near the forest has been undertaken by the
committee to provide irrigation facility to the agricultural land.
Villagers have placed great importance on making their children realize the importance of forests.
The children are involved in actual forestry operations like nursery-raising and plantation. The
children are also involved in environmental debates and discussions. Rallies are taken out during
celebration of World Environment Day, van mahotsav, etc., and are led by the children. Once every
three months or so the children accompany the forest watcher in his rounds to learn about the
forest. The watcher guides them through the forest and familiarises them with the various plants,
their uses and locally known silvicultural/religious significance. Children from other villages are
also brought to Dhani under various awareness campaigns. The children are also maintaining a
local biodiversity register that lists the biodiversity in the forest.

Institutional set-up
The success of Dhani forest protection is based on a sound institutional mechanism. In the initial
years the Executive Committee was basically concerned with the protection of Dhani forest. But
as forests regenerated profusely there was manifold increase in the other forest-related activities.
The growing forest now required efficient management. The committee was expected to perform
in a more diversified way in order to cater to these needs. The 10-member committee formed in
1987 had remained unchanged till 1992. Now, with the growing number of forest offences, the
leaders recognized the shortfalls in the forest protection committee and felt the need to reform the
institutional arrangement.
As a first step, the forest protection committee was reconstituted in 1992. By 1991, to check
irregularity in attending meetings, attendance was made mandatory and a rule was made that
members absent in three consecutive meetings would be dismissed. Similarly, fines were to be
imposed on members who either left the meeting halfway or did not attend even if they were present
in the village. In the same year an advisory committee and a working committee were formed in
order to guide and facilitate the functioning of the executive committee. An audit committee was
later formed to look into the financial matters of the forest protection committee. The income of the
case studies - orissa

committee had increased through collection of fines, forest products and occasional grants from the
forest department. The audit committee consisted of educated persons of the Panch Mouja. In order
to increase transparency, this separate group did not consist of members of the Forest Protection
Commitee. In 1995, Panch Mouza Committee was formalised as a van samrakshyan samiti (VSS)
under the joint forest management programme of the state. As a VSS, the membership of the
executive committee increased to 21 and women members were included in the committee for the
first time. In the same year a squad party for wildlife protection was formed keeping in view the
increasing instances of poaching.
520 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Impacts of forest protection

The forests protected by Dhani Panch Mouza Committee had its root system intact at the time
when protection was initiated. Mere protection led to profuse regeneration. Most of the trees
and shrubs reverted back. The continued conservation activities brought back the lost wealth of
flora and fauna, but the intensity with which they occurred in the past has changed. As people
report, the present forest ecosystem of Dhani has more than 250 plant species, 40 birds, 19
reptiles and a number of insects. Besides the natural forest, new plant species of mixed variety
(Acacia sp., Eucalyptus sp., chakunda (Cassia siamea), cashew (Anacardium Occidentale) and teak
(Tectona grandis) have been added through plantations. With the regeneration of forests and the
reappearance of various forest products, the forest-dependent villagers were able to revert back to
forest based livelihoods: fuelwood sale; collection of kendu (Diospyros menaloxylon) leaves, siali
leaves for leaf-plate making, tubers for both consumption and sale, creepers, medicinal plants,
etc. Fuelwood gathering is also allowed to people from other villages but on the condition that no
one can enter the forest with any cutting instrument. Apart from the benefits to the directly forest-
dependent population, the villagers have benefited from the checking of soil erosion and recharge
of streams flowing through the forest. In fact the initial step towards forest protection in Dhani, as
in many other villages, came from farmers having their agricultural fields at the foothills.

Opportunities and constraints

Role of the forest department
In the initial years of protection the Dhani Panch Mouja Forest Protection Committee (FPC) was in
desperate need of help from the forest department (FD) to deal with forest offences. According to
the FPC, at that time the FD did not come forward to support them adequately. Consequently, over
the years the committee become more self-reliant and came to depend on local actions, dealing
with offenders through social sanctions, etc.
The success of the effort drew the FD’s attention towards Dhani Panch Mauja and it was selected
as an ideal site for JFM. In 1993, with the state entering into a joint forest management agreement
with the Dhani villages, their support has been more forthcoming. After formation of the VSS, the
FD has been providing legal and technical support to the protection efforts. In 1996, a management
plan was drawn up, and Rs 33000 were allotted for forest management work. This fund was used by
the VSS for different forest development activities like construction of waterbody inside the forest
for wild animals, plantations, etc. The FD has made an assessment of the bamboo availability in
the forest and is facilitating the administrative clearances to allow bamboo harvesting by the VSS.
Initially the forest was degraded forest; now, due to the community’s efforts the forest has good
bamboo growth, but the community has to wait for government clearances for its harvesting,
which is creating tension between the community and the FD.
Dhani’s experience with the state machinery has been better than most, although certain issues
such as sharing of forest produce between the state and the people are still unresolved. Also, there
is considerable tension in the process of devolution of power to local communities under the joint
forest management framework. JFM has uniformly prescribed institutional arrangements, rules
and regulations for all sites. This ignores the vast array of institutional arrangements that exist
in Dhani as well as in other self-initiated efforts for protection and management of forests. This
is causing problems in Dhani. The Working Plan prepared by the FD defines the rights and access
of the people of the adjoining villages over the forest protected by Dhani Mauza. This has created
misunderstanding between protecting and non-protecting villages. This has also discouraged the
villages which have been protecting these forests for decades. The protecting villagers feel a need
to clarify the legal rights of the communities and ensure better tenurial security. Additionally, as
JFM is conceived and implemented by the forest department, the balance of power is skewed in
favour of the department. This lopsided power dynamics has created considerable tension in the
process of devolution of power to the local communities under the JFM framework.

Internal community dynamics

A source of internal conflict arises from the social structure of the community itself. Local forest
protection programmes are stuck in highly stratified and inequitable social context. Thus, caste
and gender inequities become significant friction points. In the case of Dhani, the impetus for
forest protection had come from the farming community/landed persons to ‘protect’ their lands
from the adverse effects of soil erosion. These sections are less dependent on forests and therefore
less affected by decisions that restrict access to forests. But it is important to note that in Dhani’s
 Orissa 521

case, the forest protection committee tried to deal with these equity issues by allowing greater
concessions and also alternate income sources for the poorest members of the community, in
order to reduce tension on this front. Likewise, the Dhani villagers have had to wrestle with gender
issues. Since 1995 three women have been included in the committee, but more to satisfy the
requirement under JFM. Their participation as largely token and they are rarely consulted for any
important decisions.

Conflicts with neighbours

Conflicts with outside villages have also been part of the mix with which the Dhani villages have
had to deal with. Kadamjhola, another village bordering Dhani forest, declined to participate in
the original forest protection plan but now wants the share from the forest. Other neighbouring
villages have also sought a share of the replenished flow of forest products. In earlier years, these
villages regularly infringed on the protected forest patch, causing many disputes.

Conclusion
Dhani has inspired other villagers in the neighbourhood to take up forest protection. It has
offered the community—as well as the world—some basic lessons in the value, degradation and
restoration of forest ecosystems. The reward for their efforts has been tangible and significant
for the economy of the community as well. It has added money to the common village fund, and
brought economic opportunities to the poorest and most forest-dependent villagers. The residents
were hit hardest by the original decision to limit access to the forest, and the forest protection
committee has always realized they were an essential element in the long-term success of the
restoration. Special efforts were made to compensate the directly forest-dependent sections.
The case of Dhani shows that local natural resources can also be used for sustainable economic
development of the village.

This case study has been compiled from: R. Panigrahi and Y. Giri Rao (eds), Conserving
Biodiversity: A Decade’s Experience of Dhani Panch Mouja People (Orissa, Vasundhara,
1997).

For more details contact:

Vasundhara
Plot no. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674-2542011/12
E-mail: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

Endnotes
1
Free labour for the king.
2
Clearing the lower regions of the hills for cultivating brinjal (Solanum melongena) and mandua/ragi (Eleusine
coracana).
case studies - orissa
 CCA/Orissa/CS12/Nayagarh/Gadabanikilo/Forest protection

Gadabanikilo village, Nayagarh

Background
Gadabanikilo village is situated in Khairpalli Gram Panchayat in the north-west corner of Ranpur
block in Nayagarh District of Orissa. This village lies two kilometres away from the state highway
linking Chandpur and Rajsunakhala, and is surrounded by a dry peninsular forest on three sides.
The other villages within a radius of 3-4 kiometres from Gadabanikilo are Khairpur, Badapathuria
and Kila. The village inherits its name from having been one of the four gadas (forts) of the rulers
of Ranpur kingdom.
Gadabanikilo has 143 households with a population of 1500. The main caste groups are Brahmin,
Malli, Bhandari, Khandayat, Sundhi, Dalit and Muslim. The village consists of seven sahis (hamlets)
in close proximity to each other. It is a well-knit village with strong social bonds despite the
heterogeneous ethnic composition. Agriculture is the main occupation and the villagers depend on
forests for their subsistence. The secondary and tertiary occupations are extraction and processing
of non-timber forest produce (NTFP). Other occupations include agricultural labour, pottery,
carpentry and animal husbandry.

Towards community conservation

The initiative began in 1940 when forest degradation had reached its peak and the villagers
began to feel acute biomass shortages (including firewood, leaf manure, fodder and other NTFP).
According to the village elders, there was no fuelwood available even for igniting a funeral pyre.
A group of people who realized that the community’s lives were threatened started protecting
the forest informally. This 10-member committee took over the management of the forest and
declared certain patches (such as Belabani, Khandiabandha, Jharitaila, Gadabandha Mundia areas)
as restricted areas. The mohul Dunga forest area was declared a free access area to meet the
firewood requirements of the village. Each household was asked to contribute 2 paise towards the
salary of the forest guard appointed by this informal committee.
Till 1954, strict protection was carried out in all restricted areas except in Mohul Dunga, where a
separate set of rules was formed for extraction and sharing of products. In 1954, the old committee
was dissolved and a new committee of seven members was established. The new committee
decided to carry out thinning and clearing operations in different protected patches on a rotation
basis to meet the fuelwood demands of the village (see later in this study for details). Since then
cleaning operations have been conducted regularly.
The village is protecting a total area of 60 ha. The forest protection system has evolved over the
years and the rules have been amended from time to time to suit the needs of the community.
Now there are rules not only for forest protection but also for selection or election of the members,
penalties for offenders, firewood collection and other NTFPs and their equitable distribution.
In 1973, a seven-member committee which acted as the executive body (EB) of the forest
protection committee was formed. The general body (GB) comprised all the adult members of the
community. Over a period of time both these institutions have also evolved. Presently there is no
restriction on the number of members in the EB. However, there is no place for women either in
the EB or the GB. Both these bodies do not have a fixed time for meetings: they meet any number
of times in a year whenever the need is felt. There is no fixed tenure for the EB members. They are
case studies - orissa

free to resign whenever they choose, or are ejected from their posts whenever the GB decides. The
criteria for selection of EB members is capability, credentials and leadership qualities. If a committee
member is unable to attend a meeting, a one-rupee fine is imposed on him; and if a member fails
to attend for three consecutive meetings, his membership is terminated. The EB works effectively
and resolves internal conflicts amicably without the involvement of external agencies such as the
FD and NGOs. This village forest protection committee has over time also become responsible for
socio-economic and cultural activities as also the village jantala (mass feast).

522
 Orissa 523

Systems of protection
For protection of the village the committee appoints forest guards, who keep a strict vigil on the
forests. At the time of collection of mohul and during cleaning operations, the guard plays a major
role in selection of patch and keeps a watch on the entire operation.
Offenders are excused or fined depending upon the extent of crime, and records of offenders
are kept with the committee. According to the offences record, firewood offences are prominent,
which indicates that the firewood requirements of the villagers are not met. Offences for cutting
big trees are not many.
The management practices followed by the villagers are different for different forest patches.
Separate rules are laid down for collection and sharing of mohul flowers and mohul tola (seed)
from the mohul patch and from other patches under clearing, padar (open space) patches, grazing
or cremation patches, free and regulated access patches and species of trees for logging. The
salient rules for each are discussed below.

Mohul forest
The mohul forest is legally a reserved forest and is spread over an area of 30 ha to the west of
the village. The mohul flower is available in December and January and the mohul tola is ready for
collection by April/May. All households are free to collect mohul flowers in the season, but only the
ones fallen to the ground.
The collection of tola (seeds) is systematically organised. One member from each of the 143
households is selected and they are further divided into 4 blocks; each block gets its turn in
rotation. The collection time is from 6-11 am, after which half the members of the block stay
back to patrol the forest. The remaining members undertake patrolling duty on the next collection
day. The amount of tola to be collected per person and the date of collection is decided by the
committee. The quantity is decided as per the flowering that season. The committee also decides
the amount each person can take home; the surplus is deposited with the committee. If the
amount collected by an individual is the same as the quantity to be taken home, then the individual
has to give a fourth of the amount to the committee. At the end of the season, the tola deposited
with the committee is equally distributed among the households.
In 1996, the GB decided to lease out the tola collection as the quantity of flowers was decreasing
and would not be enough for all households to collect. The forest guard got the lease and entered
into partnership with 14 other villagers for collection.1

Cleaning patches of forest

Cleaning is twice in a year: before the rains and immediately after the harvest. Cleaning basically
means removal of thorns and bushes from the understorey. Different patches are cleaned on a
rotational basis. Rules for benefit sharing and cleaning are different for different patches.
Two persons from each household in one block go for cleaning on the days allocated to their
block. Specific and separate plots are allocated to each block. Collectors are allowed to cut wood
from 7 am to 12 noon and are free to take home the quantity cleared.
On the fifth day, persons of the block who have not got their turn at cleaning are allowed. If they
fail to go on this day, they have to forfeit their turn. Since 1996, the Committee collects Rs 15 per
cartload of harvested material to pay the forest guards’ salary.

Padar patch of forest

case studies - orissa

Padar means open space without any dense vegetation. Gadabanikilo has 22 acres of such a
patch at a distance of half a kilometre from the village. The padar patch is full of thorny bushes
and shrubs with a sparse concentration of mohul and mango trees (1000-1200 mohul trees and
500-800 mango trees). 10–12 of these trees belong to the forest department; the rest are private
trees over which owners have exclusive rights.
The shrubs and thorn trees are used for firewood by the villagers. Cleaning is done on a rotational
basis and rules pertaining to cleaning and distribution in other forest patches are applicable to the
padar area. According to the villagers, till 1995 the cleaning operation had been undertaken thrice:
in 1970, 1980, and 1985.
524 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Grazing systems
Grazing is a year-long activity which begins in Holi. There are four cowherds and three shepherds
in the village. Though grazing is not a caste-bound activity, generally Gouda and Sahara castes
take up this activity in this village. There are about 500 cows and 250 goats and sheep in the
village that depend on the forest for grazing. The time for grazing is 9am to 5pm. The grazing
charges are payable in instalments in gounis (equivalent to approximately one kilogram) of grain.
The charges vary from 3-8 gounis depending upon the cattle to be grazed.
There are four routes through which the cattle are taken for grazing into different forest patches.
There are no fixed rules as to which route/direction should be taken. It depends on the herd that
comes first and the direction it takes. The other herds automatically take other directions. This
system is based on mutual understanding. The herds of goats and sheep go to the tangi (barren
land) because it is full of thorny shrubs (budubudukia kanta). Besides they also go to the Belabani
and Padar. Apart from the fixed route, the cowherds also take the cattle to the fields immediately
after the harvest: to the ammtota (mango groves) during midday in summer, and sometimes to
the nearby forests of Kochitatna, Khuntabandha, Durgapur, Aamjhara, Sanakila, etc. The village
forest supports approximately 2500 cattle with varying levels of dependence. This includes about
1000 cattle from the villages of Aamihara, Sanakila, Gouda-Patna, Dobha, Sanapathuri, Gunduria
and Khairpalli.

Sanskara system
Species such as narigini are exclusively dedicated to cremation, as they have the potential to
burn immediately after they are cut. Anyone from the village requiring wood for a funeral can take
wood from these tree species without prior information to the village committee. Nearby villages
can also take wood for funerals but with the permission of the committee.

Impacts of community efforts

The village has consciously followed a system of multiple zone management. The four zones
in the forest are uncleaned forests, left with least interference for regeneration of resources;
cleaned forests, from where fuelwood is collected twice a year by undertaking cleaning and
thinning operations; mohul collection forests; and free-access forests meant to meet the day-to-
day biomass requirements of the villagers. When the research was carried out by Vasundhara,
the conservation initiative was already in operation for over 5 decades. Despite this length of
protection, theft of resources by neighbouring villagers is a frequent occurrence. Not being able
to control such incidents has negatively impacted the quality of the forests. However, protection
efforts have definitely improved the quality of the forests from what it was before when even
the rootstock was finished. The effort has also prevented further degradation, which would have
happened if these forests were subjected to open and unregulated access.
The villagers understand the importance of forest for ground water and agriculture. Awareness
about the beneficial impacts of forests on the local agro-ecology has been one of the reasons to
maintain the motivation to protect the forests. Continuous protection has brought the forests to
a stage where different types of NTFPs are now available to meet the various requirements of the
villagers and have become a good source of income for them. Income generated through NTFPs
like mohul tola (seeds) and firewood helped the villagers in financing some of the community
development work in the village, such as construction of a college in the village.
Ecological studies have indicated that if all management zones are compared, then the best
regeneration has occurred in the uncleaned patches. Since the padar and mohul forest patches are
reserved for meeting the daily biomass requirements of the villagers, regeneration observed here
is much lower. The villagers need to use the results of this study to check degradation in these two
management zones.
Available information does not indicate the extent of impact of this protection on wildlife
populations.

Conclusion
One thoughtful action that the initial forest protection committee took was to set aside a patch
of forest for extensive use in the initial years of strict protection in other patches. This helped the
villagers overcome the restrictions while the resources were regenerating.
 Orissa 525

The forest protection effort has been carrying on since 1940. During this time the institutions,
rules and systems have remained dynamic, changing with the changing circumstances and
needs. The larger lesson from Gadabanikilo seems to be that each habitat, species, and human
community requires different location-specific management practices. Thus uniform management
prescription as adopted by the government may not be appropriate in all local contexts, where
the villagers have rich knowledge about forest ecosystems, their characteristics, local cultures and
their interaction with the ecosystem. This knowledge base needs to be tapped to develop effective,
site-based management practices in the country. There is a need to disseminate the approach,
method, practice and institutions adopted in villages like Gadabanikilo to other villages and state-
and national-level policy makers.

This case study has been compiled from: A. Rai, A. Nayak, M.R. Mishra, N.M. Singh, P.K. Nayak,
S. Mohanty, and G. Rao ‘Gadabanikilo - An Example of Community Forest Management with a
Difference’ (Bhubaneshwar, Vasundhara, 1995-6). Also in N.H. Ravindranath, K.S. Murali and
K.C. Malhotra, Joint Forest Management and Community Forestry in India: An Ecological and
Institutional Assessment. (New Delhi, Oxford and IBH Publishing , 2000).

For more details contact:

Vasundhara
Plot No. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubbneshwar – 751007
Ph: 0674 2542011 or 12
E-mail: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

Endnotes
1
Editor’s note: This case study was written in 2000. Updates could not be obtained for most of the information, so
current status is not known.

case studies - orissa

 CCA/Orissa/CS13/Nayagarh/Samantsinharpur/Forest protection

Samantsinharpur village, Nayagarh

Background
Samantsinharpur is the only hamlet of the revenue village Andharua Samantsinharpur under the
Gopalpur Panchayat that is protecting its forests. Having felt the consequences of forest degradation
in terms of acute shortage of forest produce and the fear of complete destruction of the natural
forest cover, they started protecting the forest in 1985. Samantsinharpur has two sub-hamlets:
Khandayat sahi and Harijan sahi. While the Harijan sahi comprises only Harijans, the Khandayat
hamlet has a more heterogenous composition, with Khandayats in a majority. There are a total of
65 households belonging to various castes and the total population is around 700.

Occupation and livelihoods

Cultivation is the main occupation that creates employment opportunities for the people here.
Out of the 65 households, 50 have their own land. Families without land get employed as labourers
in the fields during the agricultural season. The Khandayats are mostly agriculturalists. Gaudas are
basically pastoralists, their traditional occupation being rearing cattle and dealing in milk products,
but of late they have also taken to agriculture. Telis earn their livelihoods by trading and extracting
oil from oilseeds using indigenous methods. As the oilseeds are no longer available, the family is
now dependent on labour and selling of firewood. Gudias traditionally make confectioneries but
they too have now adopted agriculture.
Harijans are the second largest group in the village and their traditional occupation varies according
to their sub-caste. They are involved in weaving of bamboo and cane baskets, drum-beating during
social functions, headloading, collection and selling of NTFP’s and agricultural labour. During the
lean season they also migrate outside the state as bonded labour. Unlike the other castes, Harijan
women also play an important role as bread-earners. They collect siali leaves, firewood, climbers,
broom grass, khajur (date palm) leaves, fruits, tubers and berries and sell them at the Gopalpur
market near the village. Some of the collection is seasonal and occasional.
During British rule, Samantsinharpur was under the control of the Ranpur king. During this period
this area was covered with dense forests. The king allowed people to extend agricultural lands but
with some regulation, wherein a distance of 10 feet from the forests had to be maintained for
cultivating land. With the increase in population and a consequent demand for land, the forest was
eventually cut for growing crops and settlement. Gradually the forest disappeared from the vicinity
of the village.
When in 1947 the princely state was merged with Orissa state, the forest also came under
the control of the forest department (FD). The lower areas of the forest were degraded by then
and widely used for cultivation. As forests were seen as the richest source of revenue by the
government in those days, they were leased to private contractors for timber-coupe-felling. In the
year 1960, the forest close to Samantsinharpur was also given for coupe-felling, which resulted in
the felling of all the big trees. The FD saw the potential and declared it as a Reserved Forest (RF)
in 1966 to commercially exploit the resources.
During 1966-7 the FD conducted saguan or teak plantation. At that time they permitted the
villagers to cultivate crops inside the plantation area on the condition that they will protect and
nurture the teak plantations. Encouraged by this, the villagers cleared the remaining species in
case studies - orissa

the lower areas for growing crops like ragi, brinjal, black gram, etc. This resulted in the forest area
becoming a monoculture of teak plantations. The FD also was lax in forest protection and control.
Only one Range Officer existed for the entire Tangi and Ranpur area; this was obviously not enough
to keep a watch over the forest. There was heavy extraction and smuggling of teakwood from
the area. By 1980s the forest was completely destroyed. Rubber plantation by the Orissa Forest
Development Corporation (OFDC) during 1984-5 also acted as a stimulant to take up protection
efforts. With rubber plantations in the forest, the villagers became extremely concerned about the
future availability of firewood for their needs.

526
 Orissa 527

Towards community conservation

With the loss of forest cover came the inevitable loss of other ecological and economic services,
resulting in irregular rainfall, decline in agricultural yield, etc. Scarcity of firewood was the biggest
problem faced by the village. Women could no longer procure twigs and branches. Having no other
alternative, they started using poksunga herb, a non-timber species also considered as a weed,
which was never used earlier. Womenfolk suffered as they now had to spend long hours in cooking
food for the family, which affected other household work. Sitting in front of a smoky chullah was
not an easy task. People also faced difficulty in getting wood for cremation. Some villagers started
working out solutions to these problems and came to the conclusion that they had to protect
and regenerate the forest. Many discussions and debates ensued as to how and what needed to
be done. In 1984, the process of forest protection began, but it was limited to discussions and
meetings as the villagers were much clear about how to protect the forest.
In 1985 the villagers, in a common meeting, finally took the decision to protect the forest patch
of Haripur Mundiya close to the village. Haripur Mundiya is an RF and is approximately 300 ha in
area.
In the beginning two members from the village committee were given the responsibility to look
after and manage the protection of the degraded forest patch. These members, supported by the
village committee, handled the forest protection till 1988. As the forest infringements increased
along with other conflicts, a change was brought in the system. In 1988, a separate forest committee
called the Ranbijuli Jungle Surakshya Samiti was formed. This committee was constituted of active
villagers but with the participation of the entire village. An informal system with certain rules,
regulations and adoptive measures was developed. To begin with, strict regulations were framed
to protect the stumps and the roots. Outside intervention of any kind such as cattle grazing, felling
and root extraction was completely banned. Even after forest regeneration, nobody was allowed to
cut trees in the forest. In 1995, this informal system gave way to a formal van samrakshyan samiti
under the joint forest management scheme of the FD. The new committee was called the Ranbijuli
Van Samrakshyan Samiti . The committee plays an important role in conflict resolution.
Over a period villagers have developed mechanisms to improve protection and make it more
effective. The villagers adopted a voluntary patrolling system, which is continuing till today, to
keep a close vigil over the protected forest area. Two men, one from each of the sub-hamlets,
move around the forest everyday. In the night three persons, two from Khandayat sahi and one
from the Harijan sahi keep watch over the forest patch. Patrolling is done on a rotational basis
involving each household. The forest watchers on patrolling duty are called palias. When any
offender is caught, he is taken to the village and in cases where the watcher is unable to deal with
the offender alone, he asks the villagers to come to the forest. Social pressure is first exercised
over the offender. Yet if the offender keeps repeating acts like cutting trees etc., then he is
penalized with a monetary fine. The fine is fixed at Rs 50 for all types and size of trees. In extreme
situations, a case could be filed against the individual with the Range Officer, but this has not yet
happened so far.
The villagers cite examples of people from other villagers committing offences. One such example
is from 1993, when the villagers caught hold of a person from Bimbadharpur village cutting a teak
tree to repair his house. A meeting with the elders of Bimbadharpur was called and the case was
discussed. They found that the need was genuine, but the committee was not informed, and
therefore the committee decided to punish him. Instead of a monetary fine they asked the person
to return the wood by carrying the log of wood on his head back to Samantsinharpur.
Besides the forest, the village has also been managing the common resources of the village
collectively. Several informal committees have been formed to serve this purpose. There is a
village orchard that was earlier managed by the entire village. Now some trees are divided among
households, whereby every house in the village has two big trees and three small ones. The
remaining trees come under the management of the village committee. There is a stone mine, to
case studies - orissa

which people have free access to collect stones for construction. There is also grazing land which
all families are free to use.

Institutional set-up of the forest protection committee

The committee at present has a two-tier structure, consisting of the general body and the
executive or working body. The working body is the functional unit, which looks after the forest
protection and management activities. The general body comprises one male member from every
household in the village. The general body selects working-body members every year on the last
day of Ram Navami (a Hindu festival). The composition of the working body varied in different
528 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

years. In 1985, the body comprised 3 members from the Khandayat caste. In the following years
the membership increased and at present there are a total of ten members, with representatives
from both the Khandayat and Harijan castes along with some women representatives. The working
body is the main functional unit and the implementing body. The general body is basically involved
with the major decisions related to the rules, penalty system, forest activity etc. All these get
recorded on a resolution register that is maintained by the working body.
The working body is selected for one year; however the period of an individual’s tenure is not
restricted. A member can continue in his/her post for more than one year if the work is satisfactory.
In case it is not, then the members can be dismissed, and a general body meeting is called to
select a new member. But this has never happened so far.
In the initial days the committee convened meetings every month to discuss rules, regulations,
possibilities of stopping infringements, improving the system, etc. As the committee strengthened
and the protection activity continued smoothly, the frequency of the meetings decreased. In case
of an emergency, the general body or the working body can be quickly convened. Information
about the meeting is intimated to the hamlet through a dakua (one who spreads the word by
beating a metallic instrument). This person is compensated with paddy.

Role of the forest department

In the initial years there was not much support from the FD, but some forest officials did help and
encourage them at a personal level. During the period of rubber plantation, the local range officer
cooperated with the villagers in taking up plantations and promised to give employment to local
youths in the plantation. After the intervention of Vasundhara, an NGO, in 1995, there has been
a good interaction between the FD and the villagers. Vasundhara helped the people to become
aware and update their knowledge about forest policy, government resolutions and goings-on in
the forestry sector.

Impacts of community conservation

Besides the availability of firewood and other NTFP, the benefit of community conservation can
be gauged from various indications. Watchers no longer go on night visits regularly, as the trees
have grown and, with the forest cover getting dense, entering the forest has become difficult.
During the years 1986 and 1996 when the FD carried out silviculture activities in the lower forest
area, it was done under the close supervision of the committee. Villagers got labour work on a
daily-wage basis and the work was distributed on a rotational basis so that one individual from
each household got labour. Rough estimates state that each household must have received at
least 4 quintals of harvest. When forest protection started, the access by neighbouring villagers
was prevented. This resulted in conflicts on a daily basis. However trespassing and conflicts hardly
take place any longer.
Due to regeneration, the people of Samantsinharpur have also begun to enjoy some benefits from
the forest. They are free to collect dry, fallen twigs and branches of dead trees. They can collect
berries, tubers and edible leaves. The committee permits them to take bamboo for construction and
repairing house in case of fire accidents. Individuals from the village or from neighbouring villages
can obtain certain products though the committee after paying a nominal price. Cattle-grazing
is also allowed and so is the extraction of bamboo on an annual basis during the celebration of
village festivals. Villagers are however not allowed to extract timber wood for self-use or sale. Yet
mostly people are able to meet some of their needs from orchards, personal plantations and their
gramya jungle, and prefer to avoid the long distance travel to the protected forest patch. Twigs
and branches and other NTFPs derived from cleaning and thinning under silviculture operations are
distributed equally among all households.

Opportunities and constraints

The people’s institution has developed to resolve smaller disputes with outside villagers, though
the Samantsinharpur people see a possibility of conflict with their neighbouring village Krushnapur
over sharing an area of the protected forest. According to Samantsinharpur, Krushnapur village
has initiated protection process of an adjacent patch. Now these villagers are claiming a part of
the area being protected by Samantsinharpur, which, however, is not ready to share a portion with
the other village.
 Orissa 529

Arguments are gradually coming up regarding using certain forest produce, especially by the
forest-dependent groups, who meet their needs from distant protected and unprotected forests.
Moreover the community has also started raising tenure-related issues, questioning the ownership
rights over the protected patch. They aspire for support from the FD to encourage their efforts and
sustain their interest in forest protection and management.
In 1997, the villagers were involved in conflict with the OFDC, which, when carrying out the
rubber plantation in the forests, had promised jobs and benefits to the local youth if they helped
in the protection of the plantation. This was an informal arrangement between the villagers and
OFDC. Villagers protected these plantations for over a decade. However, when the plantations were
raised and it was time extract the sap, OFDC brought in contractors and hired specialised labour.
This led to an agitation and eventual stoppage of work by the dissatisfied local youth. The conflict
was not resolved till the time that this case study was written. Current status is not known.

Conclusion
The sustainability of forest protection has been largely due to strong leadership and the integration
among different castes in the hamlet. In all these years the community has developed a strong
protection and management system. They have also developed a unique system of decisions being
taken by the entire village together, but implementation is done by various sub groups set up by
the village. This fact, along with the capability of the committee to handle various dynamic issues
successfully, has united Samantsinharpur for a common concern.

This case study has been compiled from information contained in R. Panigrahi and Y.G. Rao, ‘A
Case of Community Forest Protection, Samantsinharpur Village, Nayagarh District of Orissa’;
as part of Collaborative Research Project undertaken by The Natural Resources Institute (NRI),
United Kingdom and Neera M. Singh, Vasundhara, Bhubaneshwar, 1998.

For more details contact:

Vasundhara
Plot No. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674 2542011/12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

case studies - orissa

 CCA/Orissa/CS14/Puri/Balukhand Konark/Coastal plantation and forest management

Balukhand Konark Sanctuary, Puri

Background
The Balukhand Konark Sanctuary, stretching over an area of 71.72 sq km, is located in Puri
district between 85º 52’ to 86º 14’ longitude and latitudes 19º 48’ to 19º 54’. Balukhand- Konark
was declared as a sanctuary on 23 April 1984, vide notification no. 9013, which was further revised
on 1 September1987, vide notification no. 15216. Though final notification has not been issued till
date, it is being considered as Deemed Wildlife Sanctuary as per the provision laid down in 1991
amended Wild Life Protection Act (WLPA). The sanctuary comes under the administrative control
of Puri Wildlife Division, Puri district.

Floral and faunal diversity

Balukhand-Konark sanctuary was established on the sandy tract covered by plantation of casurina
and cashew trees, along the coast between Puri and Konark. Apart from cashew and casurina
plantation, Australian acacia and eucalyptus plantation has also been done. Jamun, ficus, neem,
karanj and polang trees are also found, mostly along the course of the Khushabhadra and Nuanai
rivers.
The region is famous for the occurrence of a large number of blackbucks and spotted deer.
Stripped hyena, jungle cat, jackal, etc. can also be spotted in the area. According to the villagers,
as the plantation cover became dense and luxuriant, the blackbuck and deer population also
increased. These animals are believed to have migrated from the adjoining Mal reserved forest.
The rivers Khushabhadra and Nuanai cut through the sanctuary and are major freshwater sources
for the adjoining villages.

Towards community conservation

There are 45 villages along the stretch of Balukhand-Konark Sanctuary. The villagers have been
actively protecting the forests and wildlife of the sanctuary. The good protection work of the villagers
in preventing the poaching of animals has also led to the steady improvement of the habitat and
wildlife of the said sanctuary, in which the main species are spotted deer and blackbuck. The DFO,
Puri Wildlife Division, Mr. Sarat Mishra, acknowledges that due to the active protection activities
of the villagers, the number of blackbuck and deer have increased significantly. According to him,
in the last census held during 2005 the number of blackbuck recorded were around 110 and the
number of spotted deer recorded were more than 2000. The good protection work done by the
committees has been acknowledged, for which the villagers have also received several awards,
testimonials and certificates from the forest department and other government departments.
The cashew and casurina plantation was done by the forest department around 40 years ago,
much before the area was declared a sanctuary. Initially the protection activities were not carried
out in an organized way by the villagers. The drive of the people to protect the forest started after
a massive cyclone in this area in 1980-1. According to the villagers, the 1980-1 cyclone was an
eye opener for them. Due to the casurina plantation, the villagers felt that the impact of cyclone
was highly reduced. These villages therefore experienced much less damage as compared to many
others, which were devastated by the cyclone. It was since then that they started protecting these
case studies - orissa

plantations. This relationship of the villagers took on a greater significance once the cashew trees
grew and started yielding fruit. The people even felt the importance of the forest in their daily life
as they could get fuelwood, wood for construction purposes (like doors, roofing, etc.) and even for
occasions like marriages, festivals etc. from the forest.
The protection activity started with a group of enthusiastic people like Benudhar Pradhan,
Bhagirathi Babu, Okilya Swain and others, who motivated the villagers to protect the forest patch
adjoining their respective villages. A few villages then got together and formed the Sri Sri Belaswar
Belabhoomi Bana Suraksha Samiti (named after local Belaswar temple) and elected Benudhar
Pradhan as the president of this samiti. This committee works as an apex body of the individual
committees that exist in all the villages. 90-year-old Benudhar Pradhan is an energetic man, still
530
 Orissa 531

stands tall, and holds the post of president till today. Nearly 25 villages of the Balukhand area are a
part of the Belaswar Belabhoomi Bana Suraksha Samiti. The respective village leaders are generally
the representatives of their villages and the committee generally meets once in a month. Today
the committee is part of the Jungle Manch Federation, a larger forest protection group at state
level. In terms of representation, there is no representation of women in any of the committees.
The Harijan community, though it accepts that it has also benefited from the initiative, has no say
in the decision-making process.
At individual village level, gramya committees are formed which take up the protection activities.
During the 80s, gramya committees undertook the protection activities in an organized way. The
thengapalli (protection by rotation) system was adopted by the committee, wherein a group of
people from every household has to go to the forest for protection on a rotational basis. In 1992-3,
van suraksha samitis (VSS) or forest protection committees or gramya committees were formed,
but the thengapalli system continued.
The gramya committee holds the strongest position amongst all the institutional set-ups existing
in the village. It consists of group of elderly and respected people, and persons having leadership
qualities. All the major decisions of the village are taken by the gramya committee in the village
meetings, in the presence of the entire village.
In lieu of protection activities, the villagers have been collecting the cashewnuts from the
sanctuary through the VSS. The cashewnuts were directly auctioned by the forest department
and the VSS received some funds from
the sale/auction of the cashewnuts, which
were used for community welfare and other
village developmental works. Examples of
activities undertaken in one of the (Bhuan)
villages, include:
• Construction of village road
• Construction of tube well
• Construction of temple
• Construction of road in Harijan Sahi
• Repair of school building
The villagers said that the decision on
what activities are to be undertaken is taken
in the village meeting with consensus of
all the villagers. The sale from cashewnut
Members of Balukhand Konark Forest Protection
annually has been around Rs 30 lakhs. Committee, inspired by their 80-year-old leader (inset)
Photo: Neema Pathak

Opportunities and constraints

Impact of the sanctuary status
Because of the changed status of the area the VSSs in the villages were dissolved in 1996 and
eco-development committees (EDCs) were formed. Till date 25 EDCs have been formed in different
villages in the Balukhand- Konark area. In the Balukhand area, which comes under Puri Sadar
and Gop blocks of Puri district, nine EDCs have been formed. The remaining 16 EDCs have been
formed in the Konark area. The villagers agreed to this decision. Before the formation of the EDC,
the forester and the range officer had conducted meetings in every village explaining about the
dissolution of the VSS and the formation of EDCs. In most of the villages there was no change in
the members of VSS and EDC. The executive members of the VSS automatically became executive
members of the EDC. However the EDC mandated at least seven members from the village (two
case studies - orissa

female and five male) and one forester as the secretary.

According to the villagers, till 2002-3 cashewnuts were being auctioned from the sanctuary. The
villagers were engaged in the collection of the cashewnuts as wage labourers. Women and children
of the marginalized and Scheduled Caste families and the landless families were primarily engaged
in the collection activity and were earning Rs 5 per tin of cashew. In a particular day they were
able to earn around Rs 15. Their monthly income came to around Rs 4500-5000 per family from
the two months of cashew collection.
The order of the Supreme Court in IA No. 548, dated 14 February 2000, prohibited the removal
of dead, diseased, dying or wind-fallen trees, driftwood and grasses, etc. from any national park
532 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

or sanctuary. The direct implication of this blanket ban order was a ban on the collection of
cashewnuts by the villagers from the sanctuary area.
The collection of cashewnuts has been stopped from the sanctuary since the year 2002-3.
According to the DFO, Puri Wildlife Division, despite the ban, during the years 2002-3 and 2003-4,
the quantity of cashewnuts collected was 953.37 quintals and 515.75 quintals respectively. These
collections were seized by the FD and disposed off through the Tribal Development Cooperative
Corporation Ltd (TDCC). The revenue released and remitted to the government is as under:

Auction remitted to the

Year
Government (Rs)
2000-2001 30,74,200
Auction Sale of lots
2001-2002 34,00,900

Disposal of seized 2002-2003 18,79,242

cashewnuts 2003-2004 19,32,344

Interim application filed in the Supreme Court

In response to the Supreme Court order, the local people of the Balukhand-Konark sanctuary area
have filed Application No. 604 in the Supreme Court regarding the collection of the cashewnuts by
the villagers from the Balukhand-Konark Sanctuary in Orissa in relaxation of the court order dated
14 February 2000 passed in IA No. 548.
Application was filed by Shri Benudhar Pradhan, President of Sri Sri Beleswar Belabhumi
Banasuraksha Samiti, Balukhanda, Puri, Orissa State and the other villagers had also signed the
application.
The main submissions made by the applicant are as under:
1. That several villages which are located close to the Balukhand- Konark Sanctuary have been
helping in protecting and maintaining the forest and wildlife of the sanctuary from 1996 to
2002, when the van suraksha samitis (VSS) were dissolved and Eco-development Committees
(EDCs) were set up;
2. That because of good protection work done by these committees in preventing poaching of
animals, there has been steady improvement of the habitat and the wildlife in the said sanctuary
in which the main species found are blackbuck and spotted deer.
3. That the villagers have been collecting the cashewnuts from the sanctuary, which are not
consumed by the animals; in fact they are harmful to the animals. Besides being harmful, if the
nuts are not removed there will be more regeneration of cashew plants, which is not good for
the sanctuary and the animals inhabiting it.
4. That as a result of the stoppage of the collection of the cashewnut from the sanctuary, no
funds from the sale/auction of cashewnuts have been received by the EDCs, due to which their
community development and other works have suffered.
The Orissa Forest Department supported the Applicant’s Application and has observed that
cashew being an exotic species, its nuts are not eaten by the wild animals. In fact they are harmful
to the animals if they eat them. There are about 1,12,245 cashew plants growing in the sanctuary,
and if the collection is stopped there would be profuse regeneration of these plants, which will
be detrimental to the habitat as well as to the wildlife of the sanctuary. On the other hand, large
quantities of cashew if not removed will lead to the entry of the unscrupulous elements which could
not be prevented by the Department due to shortage of staff.
Further the removal of cashewnuts is also permissible under Section 29 of the Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972, as it would help benefit the wildlife and habitat of the sanctuary. The said provision
prohibits removal and commercial exploitation of any forest produce from any National Park and
Sanctuary but since cashew is a peculiar forest produce and cannot be used for the personal
bonafide needs of the local people, the Orissa Forest Department urged the Centrally Empowered
Committee (CEC) (set up to deal with forest related cases by the Supreme Court) to relax the order
of Supreme Court passed on 14 February 2000 and authorize the Chief Wildlife Warden to issue
necessary permit for the removal of cashewnuts from the said sanctuary.
 Orissa 533

The Orissa Forest Department has definitely taken a positive move by supporting the community
in front of the Supreme Court. The application filed by the villagers under the leadership of Benudhar
Pradhan was done under the guidance of Mr. Chhadda, the then DFO, Puri Wildlife Division.
After its observations, the Centrally Empowered Committee (CEC) recommended that the Chief
Wildlife warden, Orissa, may be permitted to allow collection of cashewnuts by the villagers adjoining
the Balukhand–Konark Sanctuary through their respective Eco-Development Committees under the
supervision of the Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd (OFDC) or the Tribal Development
Corporation Ltd (TDCC). The sale proceeds should be utilized in improving the protection and
management of the sanctuary and also for creating community assets through the EDCs in the
respective villages on a pro rata basis.
The CEC recommendation came on 30 August 2005 and the orders of the CEC will come into
force from the forthcoming season of cashew collection, i.e., April-May 2006.
While discussing the case with the DFO, he agreed about the ongoing cashew collection inside the
sanctuary and said that on record the Department shows certain amount of cashew collected by the
villagers as being seized by the Department, which is disposed off through TDCC. The revenue remitted
to the government in the last two years has been shown in the table above. Such an arrangement, though
not on legal lines, has served not only the benefit of the poor people but also the wildlife and the sanctuary.

Conclusion
The forest department acknowledges the role and efforts of the local people in the protection of
the forests of the area and is hence supportive of their activities. The case of Balukhand–Konark
Sanctuary stands out to as an exemplary case towards co-management in protected areas.
In Orissa, Balukhand-Konark sanctuary stands out as an exemplary case, where
• The communities have got their rights of cashew collection and, more important, the FD has
supported them in their struggle.
• The FD acknowledges the fact that communities have been actively protecting the forest in and
around the sanctuary and there has been not yet been any incidence of poaching or man-animal
conflict.
• The activities undertaken for sanctuary development are carried out in consultation with the
respective villages.
Thus it definitely reflects a case of co-management, but there still is space left where both FD and
the communities can coordinate and work together for better management of the sanctuary.

This case study has been written by Sweta Mishra, Vasundhara, in 2007

For more details contact:

Sweta Mishra
Vasundhara
Plot no. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar
Pin 751007
Ph: 0674-2542011/12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in
case studies - orissa
 CCA/Orissa/CS15/Sambalpur/Huta/Species conservation

Huta village, Sambalpur

Background
Humma, a renowned historical monument, is situated on the bank of the river Mahanadi, about
40 km from Sambalpur city. This important religious place for Hindus is famous for an ancient
temple of Lord Shiva, which has a unique architectural importance due to its slanting structure,
otherwise known to be present only in the Leaning Tower of Pisa in Italy. Another differentiating
feature of this place is reverence of kado or mahaseer fish as an incarnation of Lord Bishnu in his
Matsya avatar.
The best season for sighting kado fish is between the winters (around November, after Kartik
Poornima) and till the beginning of the monsoon in June. This is the time when the water is clear
and quiet.

Box 1
Basic information on mahaseer1
Mahaseer is an endemic fish species of the river Mahanadi, from which it has got its scientific
name of Tor mahanadicus. This is a trout species confined to rocky upstream portions of the
river; it generally prefers ‘lentic’ water habitat (i.e., rocky and swift hill streams with flowing
water). Mahaseer is a Phytophagus species, feeding on phytoplankton and algae growing on
rocks submerged in water.
Status and Threats
However the species is under threat and is endangered. The major threats faced are:
1. Illicit and exploitative fishing practices resulting in depletion of fish stock,
2. Habitat destruction due to pollution caused by industries and domestic effluents released in
the river that destroy spawning grounds of the species, and
3. Changes in drainage patterns because of natural and human activities.
Mahaseer is a commercially important fish for its good food value, but the stock of this species
is declining day by day. Now the Fisheries Department is also proposing a project for artificial
rearing of this species for commercial production in Sambalpur.

Towards community conservation

Humma is a very distinctive place where the community is protecting an endangered, endemic
and commercially important fish species due to religious beliefs. A stretch in and around the
temple is protected by the villagers of Huta.
Humma is a very dynamic system, due to the continuously flowing river stream. Though we are
concentrating on efforts taken by community in conservation of mahaseer, the area seemed to
be important as a suitable habitat for other wild animals too. Local people indicated occurrence of
jungle cat, Indian otter, jackal and various water birds.
case studies - orissa

The stretch of Mahanadi in Humma in particular represents a suitable habitat for trout like
Mahaseer owing to rocky streams with flowing waters. Local people relate an ancient folk tale of
a fisherman and his wife who turned into stone while cutting the kado fish. There is a monument
on an island opposite the temple, where statues of this fisherman and his wife are present. The
discussion with local fishermen revealed that fishermen generally avoid catching these fishes. If
they do get any kado fish, they release it back into the river. Catching or hurting these fishes is
considered a sin.
The most important role played in conservation is that of the fisherfolk in the village who do not fish
for mahaseer, despite its commercial importance. The entire village through the temple committee
534
 Orissa 535

is involved in decisions about the river stretch and the temple.

Since Humma temple is a monument of archeological importance,
the Department of Tourism and Department of Archeology are
also concerned about the conservation effort. Considering that
the high concentration of fish is one of the major attractions
for the devotees visiting the temple, the Tourism Department
is interested in retaining this traditional practice. The devotees
feed bhog (temple offerings) to these fish, considered an act
of virtue. The best season for sighting kado fish is from winter
(after Kartik Poornima) to the starting of the monsoon, when the
water is clear and quiet.
In addition to the mahaseer fish, this area also harbours some
rare species like Indian otter. The local people, especially the
fisherfolk community, are closely associated with the otter, since
otters help them to catch fish. Therefore it is important to map
the status of otters in this area. Historical temple of Huma, also
famous for its mahaseer fish.
Photo: Smita Ranjane

Opportunities and constraints

However, the observation of local people, especially fishermen, is that the population of kado
fish is declining. Therefore the question is how population of this species is declining, despite these
protection efforts. According to them the main reason for fish population decline is overfishing in
upstream and downstream areas where these fishes move. In Humma there is no demarcation
zone for protection: the fishermen in this village generally avoid catching mahaseer, while the fish
in the part of the river in front of the temple are considered as sacred.
The state government is also interested in declaring this area as a sanctuary for mahaseer. The
Deputy Director of Fisheries had shown interest in this; however the role of the key actors— the
local fishermen community—in this system has not been sketched out. The state government is
also interested to develop this place as a potential tourist spot; the proposal for development of a
tourist park is already sanctioned.

This case study has been contributed by Smita Ranjane of Vasundhara and Jigyasu Panda of
MASS in October 2006.

For more details contact:

Smita Ranjane
Vasundhara
Plot no. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar
Pin 751007
Tel: 0674-2542011/12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

Jijnyasu Panda
MASS, Sambalpur
Gangadhar Meher College,
Sambalpur
case studies - orissa

Tel: 09937467746
Email: jijmyasupanda@gmail.com

Endnotes:
1
Source: Personal communication with Dr. G.B. Parida, Deputy Director, Fisheries Department of Orissa, and Shri
P.K. Dar, Research Officer, Fisheries Department of Orissa, in October 2006.
 CCA/Orissa/CS16/Sambalpur/Maneshwar/Species conservation

Maneshwar village, Sambalpur

Background
Maneshwar village, located 10 km from Sambalpur, is a distinctive place where we can observe an
intricate relationship between nature and man reflected in local culture and traditions. Maneshwar
is famous for its three-century-old Shiva temple, supporting a small population of a globally
threatened species, the Indian soft-shelled turtle.

Box 1
Basic information on Indian soft shelled turtle1
Indian soft-shelled or Ganges soft-shelled turtles are distributed in large river systems like the
Mahanadi, Ganges and Indus. They also occur in large ponds and water bodies. These turtles
are often kept in religious establishments in Orissa and Assam, where they are nurtured as an
incarnation of Lord Vishnu.
This is a carnivorous species, especially attracted towards rotting flesh. It is also known to be
fairly adaptable and adapts to an array of food including cooked food.
This species breeds two times a year; pre-monsoon (i.e., May-June) and post-monsoon (i.e.,
November-December). They generally prefer sandy, loose soil, 200-300 m above the water
level of a river or a wetland for egg-laying. The clutch size is generally more than sixty (i.e.,
they lay sixty eggs at once). The exact hatching period is not known. Hatchlings crawl out
during night to avoid predators.

Status and threats

The Ganges soft-shelled turtle is endangered mainly due to illegal, uncontrolled poaching and
trading. The meat of this species is devoured inside and outside Orissa as a delicacy. This high
demand is posing an immense threat to this species, so much so that in areas where it was once
present in thousands, it is now difficult to sight a few individuals. Though this species is included
in Schedule I of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, the illegal poaching activities are threatening
the existence of the species.
Habitat destruction is known to be another major cause of its disappearance, as more and more
wetlands are being built over or getting dried.

Towards community conservation

The temple at Maneshwar has a pokhari (traditional water tank). According to the local people,
there are about one thousand adult turtles and innumerable juveniles in the pokhari, which covers
about 2.5-3 ha. This water tank is attached to the temple and fulfils all the water requirements of
the temple and other domestic needs of surrounding population. The water tank is surrounded by
the temple on one side and an earthen bund on three sides, with stone made embankments at two
places for use. However, there are some submerged rock surfaces inside the water tank specially
favoured by turtles for sunbathing. During winters, decreased water level exposes the surrounding
case studies - orissa

surface and hundreds of basking turtles can be observed. This three-century-old temple was built
by King Balaram; the present population are the descendents of a few turtles released by King
Balaram at the time of the temple construction.
Though turtles are protected through religious belief, many people love them and want them to
live safely in the pond. The turtles are an important component of the pond freshwater ecosystem,
as they feed on decaying material, thereby cleaning the water. They are an important link in the
food chain. In these tanks there is a symbiotic association between turtles and humans, where
turtles get protection and in turn keep the water clean.

536
 Orissa 537

The people of Maneshwar have played an

important role in conservation of these turtles.
Here turtles get religious importance, affection,
devotion and protection. Though this is due to
religious beliefs attached to this species, it is
proving effective in conservation of this otherwise
vulnerable species. People believe that whoever
kills or eats turtles from the temple pokhari will
suffer misfortune, and therefore nobody dares to
hurt them. Instead people feed these turtles on
temple bhog, puffed rice, biscuits, etc. The turtles
are a special attraction for devotees coming here.
Some regular visitors and permanent residents of
the temple have developed a deep understanding Temple tank at Maneshwar, harbouring the Indian
soft-shelled turtle Photo: Smita Ranjane
of the turtle behaviour, which could help in
scientific assessment and conservation of this
species.
The banks of the pokhari work as a nesting ground for the turtles, ensuring survival of the
population. The banks of this pokhari are also devoid of disturbances like cattle-washing, which
ensures protection of eggs. This pokhari is connected to the river Malatijhor by water channels.
A water canal adjacent to the pokhari is attached to the river. There is a network of water canals
meant for irrigation in the village. This network allows movement of turtles outside the tank during
the rainy season when the water level is high. This also ensures exchange of the gene pool, as the
turtles are not confined only to the pokhari. If anyone finds a turtle in the nearby area (generally
in rainy season turtles disperse in nearby agricultural fields), they come and release them into the
temple tank. The tank is facing a natural aging process through accumulation of silt and debris; this
is resulting in reduced water-holding capacity. The temple committee is proposing renovation of
the tank by removing accumulated debris and silt. However the renovation work is pending, as the
committee is concerned about the well-being of the turtles. They fear that cleaning and excavation
operation will cause harm to the turtles and their breeding grounds. They are considering a phase-
wise renovation of the tank in order to ensure minimal harm to the turtles.

This case study has been contributed by Smita Ranjane of Vasundhara and Jigyasu Panda of
MASS in October 2006.

For more details contact:

Smita Ranjane
Vasundhara
Plot no. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674-2542011/12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

Endnotes
1
Source: J.C. Daniel, The Book of Indian Reptiles (Mumbai, Bombay Natural History Society, 1983).
case studies - orissa
 CCA/Orissa/CS17/Sundargarh/Jarmal/Forest protection

Jarmal village, Sundargarh

Background
‘The forest will be of great help to our children if not to us.’ These words effectively voice the
concerns of the villagers of Jarmal for future generations. ‘If the forests can give so much with
simple protection, then they would save us from poverty and hunger. It is our duty to protect the
forest from all evil.’ Forest protection in Jarmal is one of the earliest community forest protection
initiatives in the state of Orissa. Jarmal comes under the Birbira Gram Panchayat of Sadar
Sundergarh block in Sundergarh district. Forest protection has now been initiated in more than 15
surrounding villages.
Jarmal is divided into 3 hamlets: Kalupada, Telipada and Khadiapada. With the total number
of households being 158, it has a diverse caste composition: bhuian 50 households, khadia 60,
brahmin 1, keuta 5, marbari 20 , gauda 5, lohar 3, harijan 11 and babu 3 households. Around a
fourth of the households are landless, and earn their livelihood primarily from wage labour. These
households get labour work in the agricultural fields during the season, or in neighbouring cement
factories and coal mines (at a distance of 30 km from the village). Else they migrate to cities
like Surat (in Gujarat) and other places for employment. Some landless households take up land
from landed households on a share-cropping basis. Apart from labour work these households also
depend on the collection of various seasonal forest products for livelihood. A third of the remaining
households are marginal farmers with up to 2 acres of cultivable land. They generally grow two
crops a year, which includes vegetables. In addition to cultivation, they also depend on wage
labour during lean periods. Even though their primary dependence is on agriculture, a majority of
the households in this category collect forest produce both for sale and household consumption.
The rest of the households are economically better off, having 10-12 acres of cultivable land.
These are usually households whose members are engaged in government and private service.
The rich households engage wage labourers for collection of forest produce such as mohua flower
and fruit, tamarind, etc. from the trees on their agricultural land. Paddy is the main crop cultivated
during the kharif season. The cultivators grow wheat, groundnut and vegetable during the rabi
season. The village is well irrigated with a minor irrigation project and a few wells in the fields.
According to the villagers there has been a marked increase in the livestock population over the
years. A rough calculation indicates that there are about 1000 cattle and 500 goats in the village.
The forest provides the grazing space for the entire cattle population. The forest has been declared
free for grazing. However, agricultural fields are used for grazing immediately after the harvest.

History of forest protection and management

Prior to independence these forests and their resources were under the ownership of the king
of Sundergarh. The forest was divided into various blocks and put under the charge of the local
gauntias, who were appointed by the king. The king’s permission was required for use of any forest
produce. But, in practice the gauntias issued passes to the people for obtaining forest produce. In
turn, they were required to keep a record of the quantity of forest produce taken by each individual
family. In return for forest produce, the villagers were required to provide free services to the king.
They used to carry wood to the king’s palace at Sundergarh. The villagers were also engaged in
chasing the animals in the forest when the king came for hunting. Disobedience of the king’s rule
was met with severe punishment.
At the time of independence, the forest had been transferred to the forest department. The
case studies - orissa

villagers were being granted periodic rights for using the forest. For four days during April-May,
the forests were kept open for villagers to collect fuelwood. The forest guards regulated such
operations. During other seasons of the year, the villagers had to approach the forest department
through the ward member. Unlike the king’s period, people were not fearful about the forest
department. There was enormous rise in fuelwood extraction from the forest. As a whole, the
pressure on forest gradually mounted. Inadequate protection arrangements by the then forest
department and the demands of the timber business were some of the other causes of forest
degradation. The situation was so bad that towards the end of the 60s people even started taking
out rootstock from the forest.

538
 Orissa 539

Towards community conservation

By the beginning of 1970, people began to face enormous problems in obtaining their daily forest-
based needs. Daily household necessity items such as leaf plates and cups (khali and dana) could
only be procured from far-off places such as Manamunda village at a distance of 12 km or had to be
purchased from the market. The same hardship was involved in collection of fuelwood. Items like
mushrooms, which were earlier easily available during rains, slowly became scarce. Shortage of
forest products seriously impacted the poor who depended on them both for self-consumption and
sale. Agriculture was seriously affected when leaf litter from the forests, which was used as green
manure, reduced considerably. Acute scarcity of fodder forced people to either sell off their cattle
or graze in the forest area of other villages. The other effect was that grazing in distant places
resulted in harassment to the villagers at the hands of outside villages. But the most disturbing
for the villagers was when rootstock was beginning to be extracted from the forest. Realizing the
gravity of the situation, the villagers decided to initiate forest protection.
The villagers had a series of meetings where people expressed concern and anxiety over forest
degradation. Everyone in the village considered protection of the forest as the only alternative. A
village meeting was called wherein the modalities of protecting the forest were discussed. 179 acres
of reserved forest was declared as restricted. Four persons from four different households went on
forest palia (rotational patrolling) each day. A detailed list about who would go on which day was
made and circulated. The nearby villages were also intimated and their help and cooperation was
sought. However, there was no formal protection committee formed during this time. The lead role
in the entire process was taken by two elders: Shri Sasidhar Sa and Shri Madhusudan. The palia
system continued for only one year, after which it broke down, as a few households were irregular
in going on palia. Some of them did not go at all. So those who were regular in palia gradually lost
interest. Consequently, the protection arrangement became ineffective in 1971.
In 1971 a watcher system was introduced. A paid watcher was appointed for regular patrolling
of the forest. Two ser (approximately 1 kg) of paddy per household per month was fixed towards
the salary of the watcher by all households. The watcher was paid eight khandi (1 khandi = 12
kg) of paddy per month as salary. In 1976 this arrangement also broke down. A few households
stopped contributing paddy, causing discontent among the others. These households were mainly
the landless, who found it quite difficult to contribute. It was a critical phase in forest protection.
After a series of consultations, the palia system was reintroduced as an alternative to the watcher
system. Two persons from different families went on patrol each day on a rotation basis. In 1988 a
five-member forest protection committee was formed in the general body meeting of the village.

Rules and regulations

At the start of forest protection there were no systematic rules set, except for the one-line norm”
‘No one can cut anything from the forest or enter into it with any sort of cutting instrument.’
Collection of fuelwood was allowed only with the committee’s permission. The villagers had also
sent letters to the neighbouring villages informing them about the initiation of forest protection.
The entire forest was declared restricted for grazing. Besides felling of green trees or branches,
carrying fire or setting fire within the forest was disallowed. Collection of mushrooms was free for
all. A fine amount of Rs 51 was fixed as penalty for forest offence cases. In case the offender was
unable to pay the fine amount, he was required to request the committee for a total exemption
from the fine amount. The committee has also developed a need-based utilisation system, whereby
it provides forest products to the households that need them the most.
The FPC occasionally assesses the need upon receipt of a request. The committee sells the
surplus forest products in the village at a very nominal price. A stock register is maintained by the
committee to record the use and availability of the forest produce.
case studies - orissa

Institutional set-up
A formal forest protection committee (FPC) was set up in the village with the help of forest
department after the joint forest management (JFM) resolution was passed in the state in 1988.
Jarmal was one of the first villages to be brought under JFM in Orissa. Once selected, the members
of the forest protection committee (FPC) continue as long as they are managing the affairs of the
forest properly. The general body (GB) of the village is free to select new members and terminate
existing members. As long as there is no specific complaint against any existing member, he is
allowed to continue in the committee. In case of a need to change any of the office-bearers, the
village would assemble to decide the matter on a consensus basis. The GB of the village sits at
540 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

least once a year to review the performance of the FPC. The secretary and president of the forest
committee are continuing in their positions since 1988.
The committee earns its income through contributions from villagers, sale of deadwood, income
from forest development work undertaken through contribution of free labour by the villagers,
and through the support from the panchayat under various development programmes. Besides
looking after protection and management of the forest, the committee takes a special interest in
popularising the forest protection movement in the area. This is done, for example, by organising
a football tournament on World Environment Day each year. They invite football teams from more
than thirteen neighbouring villages and educate them about environment and forest protection.
On the final day of the tournament, higher officials of the FD, local political leaders and other
government officials are invited. The committee has also made provisions for distributing prizes
and certificates of merit to the participants.

Impacts of community conservation

By 1975 the number of wild animals like deer and wild pig had started increasing in the forest.
In recent times the committee has started annual cleaning operations in the forest, which is able
to provide for the fuelwood requirements of the entire village for about two months. For the rest of
the year the villagers meet their fuelwood requirement from other sources. Those who can afford
to buy fuelwood from outside the village do so; others regularly collect leaves from the social
forestry plantation. The use of electric heaters or kerosene stoves is common in most landed rich
households. Bhusee chullaha (paddy husk) and sawdust are also burnt in a controlled chullaha,
which is used by a majority of the households. Priyagni Chullaha, distributed through the District
Rural Development Agency, is another fuelwood efficient chullaha used by the villagers. However,
in spite of this wide range of fuel sources, some villagers, particularly the poorer households, also
depend on the protected forests of Manamunda and Khajurijharan villages for fuelwood.
After the initial strict protection and once the forests regenerated by 1975, they were opened
up to villagers for regulated use. For example, the villagers can now collect dry, dead and fallen
wood freely. Villagers are also free to collect non-timber forest produce (NTFP). Increase in the
availability of NTFP has particularly benefited the landless, who depend on the sale of NTFP to a
great extent. The forests are now also opened up for grazing. Villagers could procure free branches
with leaves for raising platforms on festive occasion. The forest streams now provide water for
agriculture, which is an added incentive for the landed households.
Even though people avail a number of benefits from the forest, the committee has not yet started
issuing house construction materials to the villagers. In the opinion of the committee members,
‘Once we start allowing such materials everyone in the village would need it which, in turn, would
be adverse to the growth of the forest.’1 In its present condition, the forest can provide facilities
for house construction materials at a low level, but the forest protection committee is not prepared
to take the risk at this stage. It is planning to convene a meeting along with the district forest
officer (DFO) to discuss the matter before taking a final decision on this. The current status on this
decision is not known.
Income generation activities undertaken by the forest department contributed to the well-being
of the village. In 1998, the forest department started making a trench around the forest. That
was a major employment generating activity. A large number of people got employment for quite
a long period. This was considered as a welcome step as it saved the forest from cattle. This
prolonged work also strengthened the relationship between FD and village.
In 1995-6, under the provisions of JFM, micro-plan plantations were taken up in the forest gaps
by the FPC. In 1997, detailed forest demarcation work was initiated by the forest department in
order to indicate the boundary of reserved forest.

Opportunities and constraints

With the regeneration of forests, the wild animal populations also increased. This in turn increased
the instances of poaching, particularly by the neighbouring villages. After the initiation of JFM, the
FPC has sought help from the local forest guard to control hunting. One of the first cases of hunting
occurred in 1975, when villagers from Birbira killed a wild boar from the forests. The committee
members apprehended the offenders and filed a case against them. However, they could not prove
in the court of law that poaching had indeed happened. The offenders were acquitted and this
demoralized the villagers. Finally they took to case to the respected elders of the community. In
 Orissa 541

this trial, however, the crime was confirmed and the guilty had to offer a public apology. Thus a
compromise was finally reached.
In 1991 the forest protection committee entered into a major conflict with the village youth club.
The youth club was formed in 1991 and organised a meeting in the village. The DFO was invited as
the chief guest in the function. The conflict started when the president of the youth club claimed in
the meeting that the forest was being protected by the youth club. They also requested the DFO to
issue a written document to this effect. The claim of the club disturbed the members of the FPC. A
conflict between the youth club and the FPC members continued for a few months. The committee
members met the DFO several times. The DFO asked them to produce proof of their protection.
The FPC members could produce all necessary documents, including resolutions of the meetings,
to prove that they had been protecting the forests for last two decades. Finally the conflict was
resolved.
The village had a social forestry plantation in 1989 of around 33 acres on village revenue land.
A number of traders from outside the village are interested in purchasing the poles from the
plantation. But, the villagers are not agreeing to the idea of selling plantation due to the following
reasons: leaves and fruits of acacia serve as a major source of fuel especially for parboiling; the
trees have created a better environment in the village; money from plantation might lead to
conflicts in the village.

Interaction with the FD

The villagers in general and forest protection committee in particular have established a very
good relationship. The forest protection initiative has constantly been supported by the FD staff.
Though the interaction started several years after the actual initiation of forest protection by the
villagers, the FD support has gone a long way towards revitalizing the spirit of forest protection.
Involvement of the FD in facilitating the protection activities of the villages has greatly motivated
the villagers. In addition, with the implementation of JFM, forest development work was regularly
undertaken by the FD with the help of the villagers, which contributes to the income of the villagers.
The committee also organises an annual feast in the forest, which is attended by forest officials of
the division. Such occasions have created opportunities for healthy relationships as well as better
understanding between the village and the forest department. Participation of the higher officials
in the village functions has tremendously boosted the morale of the villagers.

Conclusion
The villagers realised that pressure from the dependent communities will mount on them if there
is acute scarcity of forest resources with only one available source. They believed that all the forest
adjoining villages should be involved in protection and regeneration of degraded forest from where
they can meet their basic needs. Indirectly pressure on their forest would be reduced in addition
to general well-being of the area. They had distributed a 1988 government resolution among the
forest-protecting villages and those who could be motivated to take up protection with a supportive
forest policy. The villages which were directly or indirectly influenced by the Jarmal villagers to
take up forest protection are Badakachhar, Amashranga, Majhapada, Birbira, Bijadihi, Talasara,
Salipali, Ghantabuda, Lahandabuda, Kumutimunda, Manamunda, Duduki, etc. Thus Jarmal was
able to positively influence its neighbours as well.

This case study was provided by Vasundhara.

For more details contact:

Vasundhara
case studies - orissa

Plot No. 15, Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar – 751007

Ph: 0674 2542011/12.
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

Endnotes
1
Editors’ note: It is unclear where the villagers meet this requirement from. Whether the forests surrounding the
protected forests have to provide for this need, and are hence negatively impacted by the conservation effort, is also
unclear.
 CCA/Orissa/CS18/Sundargarh/Jharbeda/Forest protection

Jharbeda village, Sundargarh

Background
Jharbeda is a unique case of community forest protection insofar as the strength of such self-
initiated systems is concerned. Situated in the Bonai block of Sundargarh district, the village
stands as an example of how community-level forest management systems could sustain the worst
impacts of the rural social and caste structure. From the forest protection and management point
of view, the village started forest protection in 1980. But the mechanisms adopted by the villagers
for forest protection failed frequently, leading to rearrangement of the protection system. Jharbeda
has about 142 households and a population of 700 people. There are 5 behera households, 10 rana,
30 teli, 70-80 scheduled tribe households and 17 households of the scheduled caste. Traditionally,
the village is divided into two groups: the tribal and dalit group and the general caste group. The
teli caste is economically well off. The other general caste people are mostly identified with the teli
caste.

Towards community conservation

By 1980 the forest cover had decreased drastically. It was full of thorny bushes and shrubs. Big
trees had totally disappeared from the forest. Small animals like rabbit were visible in the forest
only from a long distance. The causes of degradation were stone quarrying; forest fires, mostly
during the kendu leaf season; pressure from nearby villages, smuggling of trees/wood by the
villagers as well as outsiders; and internal conflicts which led to one party indulging in destroying
the forest. The tribals and the harijans (SC) were the worst affected, as they depended on the
forest for a majority of the months in a year. Even though many of them have land, they earned a
major part of their livelihood from the forest. Forest degradation led to scarcity of essential forest
products like leaves, fuelwood and brush sticks. It led to dependence on other villages’ forests and
frequent humiliation, travelling to far-off places for collection of forest products and the thought
that their children would not get anything from the forest and face innumerable problems if the
forests were gone. The tribals and the landless poor were the worst affected people due to forest
degradation.

The initial phase (1980 to 1988): By the tribal and harijan (SC) groups
The intimate relationship between the tribals and the forests was gone with the degradation of
the forests. This became the important reason because of which the tribals in Jharbeda initiated
protection. A few leaders like Thither Kerketa, Ramchandra Behera and Khageswar Rana took the
initiative and called for a general meeting of the villagers. The meeting was attended by 70-80
tribal and Harijan households. The general castes, especially the Telis, did not attend the meeting
as they were not on good terms with the organising group and the issue of forest protection did not
attract them much. The meeting was attended by tribals and Harijans only. The leaders explained
about forest protection and its benefits to the people. A consensus emerged from the meeting to
protect the forest. A committee was formed to look into the matter. The office-bearers included
Ramachandra Behera as president, Thither Kerketa as secretary, Bandhua Rana as the treasurer,
and a number of other members. The members demarcated the forest area to be protected.
It was decided that the committee would meet once a month to discuss and review the forest
protection activities. The day and time of the meeting was being fixed as per the convenience of all
case studies - orissa

the members. The Behera (who belongs to the milkman community) circulates the notice for the
meeting and informs all about it. The forest protection committee generally discussed about the
protection activities and other emerging issues concerning the forest. There were two things about
which the people were thoroughly convinced:
1. Since they were protecting government’s forest, they would one day be rewarded by the
government.
2. Even if they were protecting unofficially they have to secure the support of the forest department;
else it would not be possible to maintain the forest.

542
 Orissa 543

The thengapalli (voluntary patrolling by rotation) system was adopted as the protection
mechanism. Two persons were required to patrol the forest each day. In case of need the entire
committee went to the forest for protection. Two kg of paddy per household per year was collected
towards the salary of the Behera. A set of rules and regulations was framed for managing the
forests. It was decided that two persons from different households would go on thengapalli to
the forest. Unauthorised entry into the forest, both by villagers and outsiders, was prohibited.
Collection of forest products could be done from outside forest areas. The committee would impose
penalties on the offenders. The fine amount was to be decided by the committee. Once the forest
regenerated, the committee would give permission to the villagers for obtaining forest products.
Entering the forest with any cutting instrument was considered an offence. Grazing and collection
of dry branches were however allowed.
The committee undertook cleaning in the forest with the support of the forest department. The
villagers contributed free labour and deposited the wage money given by the FD in the common
fund. The committee also made a stone boundary wall around the forest, money for which was
also given by the FD.
In the initial years of protection there was no major conflicts concerning forest. The forest was
so degraded that everyone had stopped depending on it. As a result, forest protection activities
continued uninterrupted. Problems started cropping in with regeneration of tree species. Pressure
on the forest by both the outsiders and the insiders mounted.
The committee gradually found it difficult to manage the conflict situations arising out of offence
cases. It sought help from rest of the village and invited the other group (general caste) to join
their efforts in protecting the forest. Instead, the general castes indulged in destroying the forest.
Even though the committee somehow contained the outside pressure, interferences from inside
the village were not within its control. The general caste group claimed that the forest belonged
to the government and the tribal group had no rights to stop them cutting trees. Nine years of
undisturbed protection suddenly entered into a phase of chaos and confusion. A general body
meeting of the committee was organised to discuss the problem. There was a common feeling
that the forest could not be protected in an atmosphere of confusion. Repeated requests to the
other castes in the village to participate in forest protection had not yielded any significant results.
The committee decided to discontinue formal protection of the forest. However, considering the
importance of forests in their lives, a final request was sent to the villagers for taking charge of
forest protection.

Second Phase (1989): By the teli community

After a series of consultations, the teli community took the responsibility of the forest. Lalit
Sahu became the head of the committee. This was not a very formal arrangement, as most of
the households were not part it. The earlier group of tribals and harijans did not participate in the
protection. There were only 30 teli households, and they found it difficult to protect the forest.
There was tremendous pressure on the forest not only from Jharbeda village but also from the
surrounding villages. In the meantime, the youth club members had informed the FD about the
illegal storing of trees by some of the households. The FD conducted a house-to-house search
operation during this period. However, the original culprits could not be apprehended; instead those
who occasionally bring wood from the forest were caught. The incident brought a lot of opposition
to the teli group. The villagers asked them to immediately withdraw from forest protection. Unable
to contain the pressure, the group abandoned forest protection within a few months.

Third Phase (1989 to 1992): By the youth club

Before the teli group took over, many people in the village were in favour of the youth club getting
involved in protection of the forest. The youth club was involved in palli mangala (Welfare of the
case studies - orissa

Village). In 1987 the yubak sangha (the youth club) developed a mango orchard for the village.
They also organised a cycle rally to spread the message of forest protection and environmental
conservation. After the failure of the teli group, the youth club took the initiative.
In 1989, after a gap of about one year, Jharbeda started formal protection of the forest once
again. The transfer of the forest to the youth club was considered the best alternative at that
point of time. Two members went patrolling the forest on rotational basis. Gradually the number
of members increased. They declared that entering the forest without sufficient reason would
be considered an offence and the person would be penalised. Since the group was active, they
closely monitored the protection activities. With the involvement of the sangha in protection, the
pressure, both from outside as well as inside the village, suddenly came down.
544 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The yubak sangha got registered as Bapuji Club in the same year. This brought them legal
recognition and they started implementing a number of developmental programmes of the
government. The opposition group in the village (mainly the teli group) slowly became active
and started interfering in the forest. They also instigated the nearby tribal villages of Goudapada
and Badapada. These two villages, on the pretext of thekua paridhi (a customary tribal hunt),
destroyed the forest. The offenders were brought to a central place in the village. After prolonged
discussion, the offenders confessed their offence and vowed not to get involved in the Jharbeda
forest in future. In January 1990 the sangha found that pressure on the forest was mounting. The
rival groups in the village were clandestinely involved in destroying the forest. The sangha brought
a brahmin, who declared with chanting of mantras that anyone who destroys the forest would lose
his son. For about one year no one even entered the forest in fear. However, the opposition was
in search of an opportunity to defame the sangha.
In December, one person found a poisonous snake in his house. The opposition made an issue
out of this. They declared that the number of poisonous snakes and other harmful animals were
increasing due to the density of the forest. They started blaming the club and appealed to the people
to cut the forest in order to save their own lives. They also demanded an immediate cleaning and
thinning of the forest. Accordingly, the youth club took a decision to undertake cleaning operations
in the forest. The forest was declared open for cleaning. The opposition exploited this opportunity
and started cutting big trees. They also facilitated the nearby villages in taking out trees from
the Jharbeda forest. This resulted in serious destruction of the forest. Once the cleaning was
closed, the club immediately brought the forest under its control. In 1991 the club made efforts
to popularise forest protection by attaching it to the District Literacy Mission. Their slogan was: ‘If
the people become literate they will grow friendly towards the forest.’
But destruction of the forest by the opposition group continued. This was the time everyone
felt that the forest had once again entered into another phase of confusion. In 1992 Antaryami
Rana, the club secretary, took up a government job. Consequently, he started giving less time
to the activities of the club. There was no one in the club who could provide leadership to the
ongoing activities, especially forest protection. This provided enough opportunity to the offenders
to destroy the forest. Disgusted with the perennial conflict, the club decided to abandon forest
protection. During the club’s period no specific rules and regulations were framed concerning the
forest. Except for one-time cleaning material, there was no direct benefit to the people from the
forest.

Fourth Phase (1992 to 1993): By small groups

This brought about a situation where no group in the village was in a position to take over
the responsibility of the forest. It was not even possible for the village to unite for the cause.
This resulted in rampant destruction of the forest. This was the phase when small groups, on a
hamlet basis, started voluntary protection of the forest. There was no formal committee or similar
arrangement, but hamlets took the responsibility out of their own interest.
The Kisan Sahi, Odiya Sahi and Ghatipir hamlets individually protected parts of the forest from
1992-3. It was not a joint or concurrent protection by these hamlets. Rather, one hamlet took
over when the other left protection after a brief period of time. However, such efforts could not
bring stability to the forests. Forest destruction continued and there were also opposition to these
groups’ efforts from within the village. The phase ended with all three groups getting frustrated
and abandoning forest protection. During this time, the women started going to the forest and
their pressure on the forest was considered to be the greatest threat.

Fifth Phase (1994 to 1997): By women

In 1993 the DFO visited the village and explained about forest protection. With the initiative of
the DFO, a local voluntary organisation took the responsibility of restarting forest protection in
Jharbeda. A mahila samiti (Women’s Group) was formed in 1994 and the group was motivated to
take up forest protection. The women were involved for three basic reasons:
1. According to the villagers, the women who formed the samiti were involved in cutting the forest.
These tribal and SC women depended on the forest for their livelihood through fuelwood sale.

2. The women’s group would be able to check the women coming from outside villages.
3. There were no other groups in the village to take up forest protection. So people felt that it was
worth experimenting with women taking the responsibility.
 Orissa 545

Four women from four different hamlets went to the forest for patrolling on rotation. They
declared the forest as restricted. Taking earth from the forest for khapara (roof tiles) and stone
quarrying were prohibited. Grazing was allowed and so was the collection of dry fuelwood for 3-4
days during the summer. In the same year the mahila samiti took up gap plantation work with
help of the FD. The women also raised a nursery. They contributed labour and deposited the wage
money in the common fund. The samiti requested the FD to help them to undertake cleaning in the
forest. The decision for cleaning was taken because of two important reasons:
1. The forest had an unhealthy growth of thorny bushes, which hindered the regeneration of
trees.
2. The samiti decided to give some benefits to the villagers in terms of fuelwood.
The FD released a grant of Rs 1000 for cleaning operations. The samiti invited the villagers to
participate in the cleaning, and collect the materials for fuelwood purposes. The villagers responded
positively and contributed free labour for cleaning. The Rs 1000 was deposited in the samiti fund.
A total of 60 households participated in the operation and each got half a cartload of cleaning
material free. This activity of the mahila samiti was commended by the villagers and they now
reposed faith in the capabilities of the women.
In the beginning there were only 10 households that were members of the samiti. Gradually
the number of members increased. However, the 30 households of the Teli caste did not become
members. The women’s group repeatedly invited the opposition group to get involved in the
activities of the samiti, but without any result. Some of the general caste women also became
members of the samiti. The Teli caste women neither became members nor opposed the activities
of the samiti. However, in spite of everything the women were successful in effectively protecting
and managing the forest wealth of the village.
The samiti had played an active role in taking up fire-fighting measures in the forest. There have
been three major fires in the forest since the samiti has taken charge of the forest. Soon after the
women’s group took over, the opposition had set fire to the forest in 1994. The women’s group
immediately went to the forest for extinguishing it. Their request to the male members for help
was rejected and not a single male helped them in fighting the fire. The males in the village said
that since women were protecting the forest, it was their responsibility to extinguish the fire.
The samiti took account of various forest offences and decided the cases. In the initial days of
protection by this group, the women were insulted by the male members several times. The offences
included the case of stone quarrying by Tikiraposh village, fuelwood selling by women of Kinjirikela
village and similar cases. The group successfully resolved all such cases. It also collected fines
up to Rs 100 from many of the offenders. Though the instances of forest offences were frequent,
one positive development came up remarkably during the samiti’s time. The interference from the
Jharbeda villagers drastically came down during this phase. With the women taking charge, the
opposition groups in the village did not want an open fight.
There were some things which added to the strength of the women:
1. The activities of the samiti were staunchly supported by a majority of the villagers.
2. The FD also supported the women’s group and there were regular visits by the FD staff to the
village.
3. It became a prestige issue for the males in the opposition not to have conflicts with the women,
as in the traditional social structure, women are considered unequal to males.
4. People had grown sick of prolonged conflicts (for about 14 years), since the start of forest
protection by the tribal and Harijan group.
The support of the FD had strengthened the forest protection activities of the mahila samiti
in Jharbeda. However, there were situations when the women’s group had felt frustrated and
demotivated by the responses of the FD. Once the samiti sent a written application to the DFO
case studies - orissa

informing him about the rampant felling of trees, and requesting him to take quick action against
the offenders. But there was no definite action taken by the FD; nobody from the FD even ever
came to enquire about it. The offenders challenged the women’s group, saying, ‘Your FD did not
come to help you. So no one is going to come to rescue you even if we kill you.’
In 1997 the women’s group apprehended 6 carts in the forest which had come to take trees from
the forest. They rang up the DFO immediately and asked him to send his staff to decide the case.
The women held the carts for a long time but nobody from the FD reached them. The women were
thoroughly frustrated when, being unable to fight against the offenders, they had to set them free.
Slowly faith in the FD started declining and all future hopes rested in them were gone.
546 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The women also expressed doubts about the role of the present forest guard. They complained
that the guard neither helps them at times of need nor does he act against the forest offenders.
In 1997 a contractor, in connivance with the forest guard, took trees for 30 Indira Awas Yojana
houses which he had taken on contract. Repeated information to the FD did not yield any result.
A state-level award for forest protection was conferred on the women group in 1995. The
representatives from the samiti were selected to go to Bhubaneshwar to receive the award. The
samiti granted money from its own account for the travel and other expenditures. However,
the representatives returned back to village as the award ceremony was postponed. The samiti
incurred an expenditure of Rs 300. Again in 1996 three members were sent to Bhubaneshwar for
receiving the delayed award. Unfortunately, due to the death of a national leader the programme
was further postponed. The entire group was dissatisfied over the award issue. A small fraction
of the samiti withdrew from membership and indulged in destroying the forest. They accused the
representatives of misappropriation of the money which was given to them for travel and other
expenditure. Meetings could not be organised regularly, as many of the women did not attend
any longer. In June 1996 the women who attended the meetings regularly formed a new samiti
and invited the breakaway group to join. This confusion continued till 1997. The internal conflicts
resulted in loosening of the protection system, and destruction of forest by others started once
again.
Sixth phase (1997 to date): By van samrakshyan samiti – by the entire village
As the problem intensified, the samiti stopped forest protection in 1997. It was emphasised
that people dared to destroy the forest because there were no male members in the protection
arrangement. One month after this incident, the Forester came to the village and formed a village
forest protection committee. He included members from all the hamlets. Four male persons from
the four hamlets went on patrolling on rotation basis. Later the FD formed a van samrakhyan
samiti (as per the provisions of the joint forest management (JFM) resolution) and 2 members (one
male and one female) from each household were taken as members.

Opportunities and constraints

One important feature that stands out in the case of Jharbeda is that forest protection went
through a number of important phases. It has been either a caste group or a cultural group or a
similar group that took on the role for forest protection. Despite the various internal conflicts and
despite repeated failures of the various groups in doing so, there was never a period of complete
breakdown of the system, as informal protection/understanding among the people kept the system
alive.

This case study has been taken from: P.K. Nayak, M.R. Mishra and A.K. Nayak, ‘Jharbeda
Village – A Protecting Case, Sundargarh District of Orissa’; as part of a collaborative research
project undertaken by the Natural Resources Institute, UK, and Neera M. Singh, Vasundhra,
Bhubaneshwar.

For more details contact:

Vasundhara
Plot No. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674 2542011 or 12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in
 CCA/Orissa/CS19/Sundargarh/Kodbahal/Species conservation

Kodbahal village, Sundargarh

Background
Kodbahal village in Hemgir block of Sundargarh district in Orissa is a unique example of a small
population of spotted deer being protected by the village community. The villagers consider deer
protection their prime responsibility in addition to the protection of the forests in their surrounding.
The villagers have not only given protection but also sacrificed part of the agricultural yield, which
is lost due to deer depredation. The people at Kodbahal consider the deer their associate in nature,
with whom they have to share resources.
Kodbahal is largely agrarian. Along with agriculture, forest products like sal leaves and seed,
mahua flowers and fruits and other items provide livelihood security for the lean period. Almost all
the villagers depend upon the forest for fulfilment of their daily needs.

Towards community conservation

Spotted deer are the natural inhabitants of this area. People relate that in the pre-independence
era, the people of Kodbahal used to accompany zamindars (landlords) and rulers in their hunting
games; however this practice stopped after independence. In 1945 there was a massive degradation
of the forest because of contracts being given to fell the forest by the state. This reduced the
habitat for the deer and their population also declined. The villagers started protection of deer
about 20 years ago. The protection measures became intense after 1998, when villagers also
started protecting the forests, although villagers earned their livelihood as daily-wage labourers
through the contractual logging. On the other hand, logging caused degradation of resources and
ultimately caused scarcity of the resources on which the villagers were dependent. This resource
crunch led to the realization that they needed to protect their own resources. Despite taking a
decision to protect the forests, internal conflicts between the two hamlets in the village prevented
them from being able to implement their resolve. Eventually, the forest department and the district
administration took a lead to resolve these conflicts through bilateral talks, leading to the formation
of Kodbahal Van Suraksha Samiti (VSS) in 2000. After this the deer got better protection due to
regular patrolling by villagers, and this also led to habitat creation and improvement.
The Kodbahal VSS comes under Kodbahal beat in Hemgir Range of Sundargarh Forest Division.
The VSS was formed on 29 January 2000. There are 205 members in the VSS, out of which 28
are Scheduled Castes and 42 are Scheduled Tribes. The area assigned to the VSS is 200 ha, part
of which is reserved forest and part comes under Revenue Forest. The mixed deciduous forests
are dominated by sidha, karala and sal. Villagers categorize their forest into four categories:
patra jungle (scrub forest), gramya jungle (village forest), sal forest and bamboo forest. These
categories are assigned depending upon the type of vegetation present in that area. Some parts of
the forests are assigned particularly for grazing and are called gauchar land. Grazing is therefore
prohibited in the rest of the forest. This ultimately promotes forest regeneration and increases
availability of resources for wild herbivores.
Villagers are very vigilant about controlling poaching of chital. Whenever there are incidents of
poaching, villagers quickly inform the FD. The local forester, along with villagers, moves to the
place and takes necessary action against the poachers. This system is proving efficient in reducing
the poaching cases.
The deer prefer to come into the habitation area and agricultural land since they feel safe in the
village, where nobody tries to hurt them. Villagers look after any animal that gets injured. They
also try to avoid man-deer conflict by using indigenous techniques like hanging clothes (mostly
saris) in agricultural fields to keep the deer away from the crop. In Kodbahal deer damaging
case studies - orissa

agricultural fields is a common sight. Local people have been tolerant of this so far.
The villagers have evolved the agricultural system in accordance with the behaviour of their wild
companions. As the deer prefer to stay in the uplands, the upland is generally kept fallow or is
cultivated with crops like saru or taro, chilli, etc., which are not eaten by the deer. The villagers
are well accustomed to the lifestyle of the deer: they are well versed with resource-use pattern of
deer, can easily predict the presence of the deer and have a deep knowledge of their behaviour
such as diet, seasonal migration and breeding, and understand all the requirements of the animals
like the need for dense cover to hide, water and food availability, salt leaks and fawning grounds.
According to the villagers, the hilly upland area forms the best habitat for deer; this area harbours
547
548 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

scrubland with patches of grassland. In this area the deer get food and vegetation cover to hide.
It is also inaccessible and is protected from grazing. Last year the village committee had planted
edible grass for deer in the season of food scarcity (i.e., summer) that solved many problems like
straying of animals outside the secure area, crop depredation and many others. Earlier villagers
were protecting the forest through thengapalli (rotational patrolling). This was done by four
members throughout the year, while in the peak season of theft—the karadi season (the season of
bamboo sprouting)—eight members were involved in patrolling. In this year the VSS has employed
three watchers for daily patrolling through the FDA fund. However in the peak season of theft,
villagers assist the watchers in the patrolling.
Protection of the forests is also economically beneficial for the villagers. About 236 people in the
village are engaged in the collection of non-timber forest produce (NTFP). NTFP collection and sale
is therefore one of the mainstays of the village community. When the forest got degraded in the
past, limited availability impacted the communities economically. Regeneration of forests has not
only provided a good habitat for wild animals but has also increased the availability of NTFP for
the villagers.

Opportunities and constraints

However this attachment with deer is becoming a factor of distress for the people from surrounding
villages. The Kodbahal villagers are facing the ire of other villages, who are interested in deer
poaching and logging. According to the VSS president and other VSS members, deer are safe in
the area of Kodbahal VSS, but straying into the surrounding areas is risky.
It is evident that availability of agricultural land is very low in the village; the irrigation facilities
are also very limited. In this situation, people in Kodbahal are ready to sacrifice part of their crop
to the deer, indicating their dedication towards protection of the species.
Due to protection and regeneration of the forest, the deer population is increasing. This trend
is providing space for natural predators of the deer like tiger, leopard, hyena (Hyena hyena)
and jackal (Canis aureus). According to forester Mr. K.C. Panda, sighting of Royal Bengal Tiger
(Panthera tigris) in this area is very frequent. This forest is also a shelter of other wild animals
like barking deer (Muntiacus munjak), four-horned antelope (Tetracerus quadricornis), sloth bear
(Melursus ursinus), Indian wild boar (Sus scrofa), and forest and water birds.
Seeing such dedication, one wonders what is the motivation behind such an effort? What do the
villagers get from this protection? The explanation given by one of the villagers is: ‘We believe that
the trees/ bushes eaten by deer sprout more efficiently, ultimately increasing the productivity.’ He
adds, ‘Deer eat grass, fruits, etc., which helps in forest regeneration.’

Conclusion
To enhance the efficiency of the protection measures, the villagers are hoping for formal recognition
of their efforts through inclusion of this area in official protected areas, as they could get funds
for better management of the deer habitat. The forest department is also showing interest in this
process; however, it is not clear whether the department is going to declare this area a sanctuary,
where people have to face restrictions on their fundamental rights, or a community reserve, where
people could exercise their rights along with a stake in management of wildlife.

This case study has been contributed by Smita Ranjane and Tushar Dash of Vasundhara,
Bhubaneshwar and Debasis Pati and Swarnamanjiri of PRAYAS, Hemgir, Sundergarh.

For more details contact:

Smita Ranjane/ Tushar Das
Vasundhara
Plot no. 15
Shahid Nagar, Bhubaneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674-2542011/12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

Endnotes
1
Sources: S.H. Prater, The Book of Indian Animals (Mumbai, Bombay Natural History Society, 1971); S.H. Deal,
Wildlife & Natural Resource Management (Thomas Delmar Learning, 2002); http://www.haryanaonline.com/fauna/
chital.htm.
 CCA/Orissa/CS20/Sundargarh/Phuljhar/Forest protection

Phuljhar, Sundargarh
Background
Phuljhar is situated in the Bisra block/range of Sundargarh district in Orissa on the borderline
between Orissa and Bihar. Phuljhar is a case which reflects a never-say-die attitude in the
protection of its forest resources. Since 1965, protection has been jeopardized and revived many
times. The forest adjoining the village is a sal forest, which cannot cater to all the forest-based
needs of the people. The villagers therefore depend heavily on other forest areas to meet the
other requirements. Yet the realization that the forest is a village property mustered the support
of the villagers to protect it. With more than 100 ha of area under protection and over 30 years
of protection, Phuljhar stands as the only forest-protecting village in the entire panchayat of nine
revenue villages. Lindra, another village in the panchayat, has recently started protection (in
1997).
There are 120 households in Phuljhar. There are various community groups, including the orang
tribe, Muslims, sahoos and scheduled castes. Ten households have no land, 20 are involved in
business (grocery, cloth and dairy), 20-25 are dependent on wage labour, 10–15 households
are engaged in regular service, while the rest are cultivators. While some households cultivate
vegetables, paddy remains the single most common crop grown here. Only five households sell
paddy and the rest of them use it for their own consumption; the paddy may or may not meet
their needs for the whole year. Those depending on labour for their livelihoods work in a brick kiln
for ten months (September to June) in a year and as agricultural labour for the remaining months.
There is also seasonal migration outside the state, the intensity of which increases during crop
failure.
Before 1960 Phuljhar was surrounded by dense forest with no roads and infrastructural facilities
in place. Along with sal, other species like mahua, char and sissoo were also available. Though
the village heavily depended on the forest, its importance was realised only after the forests were
gone. The forest in discussion is the khesra (revenue) forest, which is within the village boundary.
There is however no clarity of whether the revenue forest belonged to the village or not. The
density of the forest allowed people to have a self-sufficient life with absolutely no dependence on
the outside world. Collection of sal seeds, mahua flowers and seeds, mushrooms (from fields and
forests), berries and sal leaves provided alternate sources of livelihood in case there was a crop
failure. There was no formal committee or rules governing the affairs of the forest.

Towards community conservation

Trouble began after a railway line from Rourkela to Ranchi was operationalised in Dec 1965. The
work of the railway line took away all the valuable forests. All sal trees were felled and used as
railway sleepers. In retrospect some villagers feel that they were fortunate that only one railway
line was laid. Initially people were supportive of the railway line as it meant more connectivity,
labour opportunities in the construction of the line, and employment in the railways. These kept
the villagers from resisting or opposing the project. At the end of 1965, when they felt the scarcity
of forest resources to meet their requirements, the villagers started feeling the pressure. Procuring
sal leaves even for daily use (used for making plates) became difficult and the thick forests became
lengthy patches of cleared forests. The Phuljhar villagers then realized that they were in deep
trouble and that it was impossible to live without forests.
case studies - orissa

First phase of protection

In December 1964 some villagers—Ratia Orang, Rama Bhagat, Sakarati Puja and Jinat Mian—
came together to protect the forests. Many of the villagers were not interested, as there was
no forest remaining to protect. However a general body meeting was organized to discuss the
possibilities of forest protection, and after prolonged discussions the entire village unanimously
agreed to initiate forest protection. One reason that they initiated protection of the khesra forest
was that they could not heavily depend on the adjoining reserved forest which belonged to the
forest department (FD). During this time there was no forest committee and these four people
were given the main responsibility for forest protection.
549
550 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Two watchers called moharirs were appointed, though they were not required to follow any regular
system of watching and guarding the forest. They initiated a flexible system of protection and went
patrolling whenever they had time from agricultural or personal work. Each moharir was to be paid
either Rs 5 or given 5 kg of paddy, which was collected from each household. The moharirs were
supposed to patrol the forests and inform the leaders in case of forest offences or irregularities.
Once the offender was caught, the cutting instruments would be seized and the villagers would
decide the penalty accordingly. Only after the penalty was collected was the cutting instrument
returned. In case the same person repeated the offence, a severe penalty was imposed.
Second phase of protection
In 1981, after 17 years, the forest protection system broke down. This was mainly due to the
death of both the watchers, Sukhei Orang and Mahadev Mahali, in 1981, who were, the villagers
say, extremely committed to safeguarding the forests. They had taken selfless initiatives for the
same. As they grew old they began spending the entire day in the forest. The villagers say that
their contribution to forest protection was supreme and that the village was not able to find equally
committed watchers on a full-time basis. Whoever else was taken could not prove effective, as
they had to devote time to agriculture and other livelihood-related work. Such irregular patrolling
resulted in the interference of outsiders as well as insiders in the forest, leading to confusion and
conflict. Also, the benefits derived from the forest were not enough to meet the needs of the
villagers for fuelwood and other forest products. After 17 years of protection, people’s expectations
from the forest were high, and people consequently started frequenting the forest to meet their
needs. An offence by one villager encouraged others to follow suit. People also became very
irregular in giving their monthly contribution to the watchers and as a result the watchers also lost
interest. Some households stopped contributing altogether. For Phuljhar it was time to critically
reassess the benefits and other issues related to the forest.
Soon after the breakdown of the system, an ad-hoc committee was formed. It did not function
well and interference in the forest continued. Forest protection was scattered: as one hamlet
protected, the other hamlets destroyed. This sort of an arrangement indicated that people were
concerned but could not come together to tackle it. This situation continued for eight years, till
1988. In the opinion of the leaders, one of the main reasons for the breakdown of the protection
system was the absence of strong leadership. The continued destruction and interference resulted
in massive depletion of the forest. The forest was back to what it was in 1965. This disturbed the
villagers and they realized that cutting the forest was not a healthy sign. A common understanding
for re-initiating formal protection was established once again.
Third phase of protection
In May 1988, a general body meeting of the village was called for, and a five-member forest
protection committee was formed. This old committee was restructured in the process. Four
watchers were appointed and rules and regulations were modified. A fine amount of up to Rs 125
could be imposed. The president and secretary were to take all decisions with regard to felling
permissions for household requirements. Each household was to pay 15 tambis (1 tambi = 750–
800 gm) of paddy per month to contribute to the watchers’ salary. Non-compliance with the rules
would result in the cancellation of any rights of that person over the forest in the future. Strict
protection continued till May 1994. The protection once again enhanced the growth of the forest.
After six years of protection and consequent regeneration, villagers began entering the forest for
fulfilling their needs. As forest offences were on the rise, the villagers who were contributing paddy
or money for 30 years were distraught. The three broad reasons for this to happen were:
1. Abundant forest also meant more scope of exploitation and large scale use.
2. The rules with respect to benefit-sharing needed to evolve.
3. A dominant sal forest does not cater to all the needs of the people such as agriculture, building
material, etc. Besides, it took some time before the sal trees could be used.
Through 1994, the women participated actively in cutting trees for fuelwood. In order to keep a
check on the women offenders and to motivate more women into protection activities, a decision to
involve women in forest protection was mooted and accepted. A seven-member special women’s
protection force was created. They were to help the male watchers in the forest protection. The
group patrolled the forest mainly to catch women offenders. This was done at a time when it was
strongly felt that forest protection was impossible without the active involvement of women and
that this step would force them to realize the gravity of the situation. Unfortunately, this group of
women broke up in 1995.
 Orissa 551

Fourth phase of protection

In 1996 certain cases of conflict further weakened forest protection. The need for invigorating
the protection stemmed from a case where a villager of one hamlet cut a mahua tree without the
permission of the committee. This agitated other members from the same hamlet, and two groups
were formed. Both groups felt that the forest protection did not yield any result and implied that
they were not satisfied with the functioning of the committee. A series of discussions were held
and it was found that the committee had a number of weaknesses. A majority felt the need for
restructuring it. The main problem identified was that the committee continued to function without
any change or review of its activities or leadership rotation.
After more deliberation in 1997, a general body meeting was called again to elect a new forest
protection committee. Eight members were elected and new rules and regulations were set to
enable the committee to evolve. The new protection arrangement had two new provisions. One
was that the moharirs were taken in as regular committee members for the first time, and the
second was the equal distribution of the collection among the committee members (earlier it was
only for moharirs).
Some of the new rules were:
1. The secretary and assistant secretary would approve the applications of villagers for forest
requirements and inform the moharirs.
2. The four moharirs would go patrolling on a rotation basis: i.e., two of them on alternate days
unlike the earlier system.
3. A monthly contribution of Rs 35 or 15 tambi of paddy per household was fixed as charges
towards protection. This was divided equally among all the eight members of the committee.
4. Prize money was awarded for information/intimation about a forest offence. For a general
villager it was Rs 30 and for committee members including the moharirs it was Rs 20.
5. The rule that no tree was to be cut without permission would have to be strictly followed.
6. In case of an application, the committee members would enquire whether the need is genuine
or not, and accordingly assign the task to the moharirs.
7. Maximum two trees per household were allowed to be cut in a year. If more trees were required,
then they would have to be bought from outside. A charge of Rs 10 was to be collected and
deposited in the committee fund.
8. A fine amount of Rs 50 was fixed for a villager from Phuljhar. The amount could also differ from
case to case and when the offender was from another village.
9. For marriages, one tree and branches was allowed for a chamundia (platform with temporary
roof) made of tree branches.
10. After a tree is cut, the root is to be preserved for regeneration and the committee makes
provisions for protecting it.
The committee has the primary function of protecting the forest. Besides that it has certain
seasonal functions. In the agricultural season the committee takes decisions and imposes penalty
on cattle-owners when cattle destroy the crops. It also acts similarly during the vegetable cultivation
season. The committee also intervenes and decides in conflict situations. The committee members
do not have a fixed tenure, but continue to function till a conflict between members arises or the
committee does not function well. If there are many complaints against a single member, then the
member is replaced with someone else.
Interaction with the forest department (FD)
The FD has approached Phuljhar several times for forming committees and helping them with
forest development work such as trench making, plantations, etc. But Phuljhar has refused. They
case studies - orissa

feel that the FD will raise the plantations, hire guards and gradually take control in their hands.
Phuljhar is averse to the idea of seeking help from the FD. They recount experiences of how the
reserved forests were sold out to contractors and green trees were felled en masse. They believe
that this could happen only because the forest was under the custody of the FD. That is why
they chose to protect the khesra forest. Villagers also say that the FD staff is insensitive towards
people’s needs. Villagers do not want to be in a situation where for every permission they have to
look up to the FD. Also any collaboration with the FD would imply other outside villagers accessing
what will be called ‘government’ forests.
552 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Impacts of community conservation

The first phase of protection resulted in the growth of forests to provide material for repairing
and construction. Sal leaves were available again. Nearly 15-20 quintals sal seeds were collected
per year and usually got exchanged for salt. Collection of char seeds for consumption was also
resumed. When the forest cover improved, grazing was allowed during the rainy season.
There was dissatisfaction amongst the villagers with regard to the lack of benefits from the
regenerated forest. For the villagers the forest has still not started supporting their needs, but
they feel that after 10-15 years more they would be able to avail benefits in terms of wood at
least. Today sal is invariably used for a number of purposes that range from house construction to
agricultural equipments to fuelwood.
At present the forest provides facilities for grazing, collection of mushrooms for three months, sal
leaves and seeds, and occasionally house construction material. Earlier the people of one hamlet
used to engage in leaf-plate making but they have abandoned this as the sal trees have grown
tall and out of reach for leaf collection. Many villagers see this as a positive indicator of a growing
forest.

Opportunities and constraints

An overall conclusion would be that sal being the dominant species, other trees that are sources
for NTFP collection are not much present. The villagers have to go far off, sometimes even to Bihar,
in order to get wood for agriculture and building material. However, now that many other villagers
have also initiated forest protection, they face difficulties in accessing those forests as well. At
times, they are stopped by forest guards, and they have to pay fines or give bribes to them. The
villagers strongly feel that their forest would eventually save them from such humiliation.
The real problem that Phuljhar faces is that the choice of species for differential use is not
enough. Secondly, internal dynamics and external pressure do not let the initiative survive for long
stretches of time.
The future plan of the committee is to address the issue of lack of women’s participation in forest
protection. The committee also needs to consider the source of fuelwood for the women rather
than just preventing them from collecting fuelwood. The committee has plans to involve a 15-
member woman thrift and credit group. This group would then be responsible for the protection of
the forests and members would earn salaries as watchers so that their common fund can increase.
This would not only ensure the help of women in protection but also enable some development
work through this group. Apart from this the committee has no other plans for the future.

This case study has been compiled based on information contained in: Vasundhara, ‘A Case
Study of Jhargaon Village, Jharsuguda District, Orissa. Devolution of Forest Management:
Creating spaces for community action for forest management (Bhubaneshwar, Vasundhara,
2001).

For more details contact:

Vasundhara
Plot No. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubbneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674 2542011 or 12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in
 CCA/Orissa/CS21/Sundargarh/Suruguda/Forest protection

Suruguda village, Sundargarh

Background
Suruguda, a nondescript village of Orissa, was awarded the national Indira Priyadarshini Brikshaya
Mitra Award in 1989 for efficient forest management. This tiny village, which consists of 155
households under 6 hamlets (padas), has become a source of inspiration for adjacent villages and
the entire district. The village consists of a mixed community of Agharias, Brahmins, Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The village is located about 23 km from the district headquarters.
Agriculture, agricultural labour, service, sale of milk, carpentry and bamboo weaving are some of
the major occupations in the village. Floristically, the forests are dominated by sal and bamboo.
Until 1960, the khesra forest (revenue forest) was under the direct supervision of the landlord.
The villagers could extract dry wood, NTFP like leaves, fruits and flowers from the forest with
the permission of the landlord. These forests were popular hunting grounds of the king and the
landlord, and punishment for offences was therefore severe. It was the fear of such punishments
that resulted in the preservation of the forests in this region. However after 1960, as the landlord
system was abolished in India, the degradation of the forest began.
It was around this time that the government of India also started coupe-felling in forests for
timber extraction. Large parts of the forests were leased out to contractors. This led to considerable
degradation of forests between 1970 and 1985. The degradation was further accelerated because
of unrestricted cattle grazing, excessive extraction of wood (especially by the dominant Agharia
community), indiscriminate forest fires and stone quarrying. The adjoining villages were equally
responsible for the depletion of the forest. For the lower income groups in the village, particularly
the scheduled castes, the forest became a quick source of money. By 1980, the forest had reduced
to a barren patch. Although this affected every villager, it was the economically poor, largely the
scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes, who were hit the hardest. The affluent villagers, i.e.,
the higher castes, were not much affected, as they could afford to buy fuelwood and agricultural
tools from outside.
With the end of the landlord system, many community institutions emerged in the village. The
agharia community, which was strong in the times of the landlord, continued to play an important
role in these village administration institutions. The village constituted a number of committees
to deal with education, religious functions, etc. However, decisions relating to the village as a
whole or inter-/intra-village conflicts are collectively discussed in a village meeting. One male
member from each family has to participate in the village meetings. Conflicts are taken to the civil
administration if not resolved at this stage.

Towards community conservation

Interestingly, it was a conflict between Suruguda and the neighbouring village of Jhariapali that
led to forest protection. It happened when the villagers of Jhariapali did not allow the harijan
community of Suruguda village to purchase rice from their market any longer. To teach the
Jhariapalis a lesson, it was decided to prevent Jhariapalli villagers from entering the forests that
they accessed for their firewood and fencing-material needs. Initially the decision to protect the
forests was taken by two padas in the village: harijan pada and bhuiyan pada. A forest protection
committee was formed and a letter was sent to the forest department to seek permission for
protecting a part of reserved forest. A few months later the entire village joined in and a village
case studies - orissa

meeting was called. In this meeting an executive forest protection committee was formed with
representation from each hamlet (pada). Though the incident with Jhariapalli was the immediate
trigger for forest protection, the other concerns that influenced the decision were acute scarcity of
fuelwood and wood for house construction, agricultural implements, etc. Soon the villagers were
protecting 80 ha of reserved forest and 40 ha of revenue (khesra) forests.
The first informal forest protection committee (FPC) was formed in 1985. FPC members were
selected from within the general body with representatives of all caste groups. The people who
had taken the initiative for protection were included in the committee. At this stage there was a
dominance of the scheduled caste communities. However, changes in the committee came when it

553
554 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

was formalized later, first as the van forest protection committee (VFPC) in 1989 and then as the
van samrakshyan samiti (VSS) in 1994 under the forest department’s joint forest management
programme. The initial effort was informal and the leadership was more committed to forest
protection, whereas in the more formal set-up the leadership is more for power and resources.
For the protection of the forests, initially thengapalli1 was practiced. After a couple of years,
as the pressures on the forests reduced, the number of people going for patrolling was reduced
from six to two. The nearby villagers gradually became aware of the protected status of these
forests and the penalties to be paid by offenders. The committee members regularly monitored the
protection arrangement and rectified its faults. A strict set of rules was formulated, which evolved
over a period of time, depending on the changing circumstances. An informal set of rules started in
1985, with a complete ban on entering the protected forests. In the initial periods, night patrolling
was also done, which subsequently stopped with the reduction in the number of offences. In 1988,
different rates of penalties were introduced for different kinds of offences. In 1990, the amounts
were further increased to put greater pressure on the offenders. In 1994, because of JFM the forest
committee was formalized and a formal set of rules and regulations were worked out.
There are specified rules for regular thinning of the forests under the FD-promoted silvicultural
practice. The thinning operations are performed with the objective of promoting the growth of
valuable species. The other rules for protection include:
• Wood-cutting instruments are prohibited from being taken into the forests.
• A differential penalty for different kinds of offences has been worked out.
• With the permission of the committee, free collection of firewood is allowed on Sundays.
• Bamboo-shoot collection is prohibited.
• Strong restriction on cutting sal, mahua and bija.
• Entry of cattle to the forests is allowed only in the pre-monsoon season. For the rest of the period
a patch of grazing land has been specified.
• Entry of neighbouring villages is restricted.
• Strict penalty against those who fail in patrolling duty.
• Individuals helping the committee in catching the offenders shall get 50 per cent of the seized
produce.
In addition to setting up these rules and regulations, the villagers also strictly monitored the
spread of fires for the first few years and took measures to put out fires quickly.
The rules, frequency and dates of thinning, efficacy of management, offences, etc. are all
discussed in the meetings of the committee. The periodicity of meetings is not strictly fixed. In
the initial period, meetings of the executive body took place once a week. Gradually the frequency
decreased to once a month. Whenever required and or whenever an offender is caught, meetings
are immediately called. The committee appoints a person from the village itself for intimating
committee members and the villagers. The person who gives the message is called a katuala. While
executive committee meetings are restricted to executive committee members, in the general
body meeting participation of at least one person per family is mandatory. Mostly men attend
these meetings. In the executive committee as well as general body, there are women members;
however, they only attend the meeting if it is being called by the FD or some visitors have come
to the village.
For forest protection, each household contributes voluntary labour for patrolling, irrespective of
the family’s financial condition and other constraints. Keeping in mind the economic conditions of
the NTFP gatherers, the committee has not put any restrictions on NTFP gatherers from nearby
villages.
The initial problems were to find ways to deal with the pressure from forest-dependent villages.
A lot of effort had to be put in to convince the villagers to protect the forest for their livelihood and
the future generations.

Impacts of community effort

Strict protection seems to have helped improve the vegetation growth in these forests. A field
study conducted by Vasundhara in 2001 indicated that there is a good regeneration of commercially
valuable species such as sal and bamboo. The quality of bamboo boles indicates a good harvesting
 Orissa 555

technique and good regeneration. The frequency distribution pattern of tree species indicated that
most of the species are regaining their vigour through safeguarding their regeneration stands.
However, some NTFP species such as beheda and hirada do not seem to be regenerating as well
and could do with better protection.
Information on the status of fauna is not available.
Although the regeneration of NTFP species was recorded to be low, the production of NTFP has
improved ever since the protection started. Protection has also ensured higher concentration of
medicinal plants, which are an addition to the local income.
After years of protection, the villagers have started getting benefits of the protection. In 1990
the villagers extracted 266 cartloads of fuelwood, and in 1997 around 3,600 pieces of bamboo
were harvested. The increase in NTFP has contributed to the incomes of people belonging to the
marginalised sections of the village. In addition the villagers will be getting 50 per cent of the
benefits from harvest of valuable timber under JFM.
JFM has also enhanced institutional capacities. The villagers now have greater confidence in
dealing with the FD and other outsiders. Since it is the first village in the locality to start forest
protection, it has been a model for the neighbouring villages.
To protect trees and reduce their dependence on them for fuelwood, chullahs (a locally developed
stove which uses paddy husk as fuel) were adopted by the Suruguda households. Now the villagers
also have various other forms of fuel like gobar gas and electric heaters. The VSS identified 50
households for a 50 per cent discount on alternative cooking equipment.

Opportunities and constraints

Role of the FD
In the initial stage of the joint forest management process, the forest department (FD) was
very supportive, but this support gradually declined. In fact the FD helped the upper-caste
community gain a position of prominence in the protection process, which had been dominated
by the disprivileged sections when the initiative was informal. In addition, there was little or no
involvement of the villagers in formulation of the micro-plan; in fact many villagers are not aware
of its existence. The micro-plan has not been implemented effectively. It is apparent that the FD
is yet to internalise the concept of people’s participation.

Equity in decision-making and benefit sharing

Participation of women in forest protection is only nominal, to meet the requirements of the JFM
resolution. The male leadership of the initiative has not felt a need for involving women in decision-
making.
The distribution of benefits from forest protection among the villagers was largely equitable in
the initial years. Of late, however, elite sections are appropriating higher benefits: for example,
in some cleaning operations the benefits have been grabbed by a few influential people. While on
the one hand powerful people often get higher benefits, the poor end up paying a much higher
cost for forest protection. For example, each family has to contribute an equal amount for forest
protection activities. There is little sensitivity towards those, such as old people and widows, who
may not be in a position to pay the contribution. According to some people from the disprivileged
sections, the interim needs of the community are also being addressed inconsistently and with a
strong caste bias. However, considering that a number of poor families and women from the village
as well as neighbouring villages depend upon NTFP sale for livelihood, there is no restriction in the
collection of NTFP.
case studies - orissa

Local Politics
Presently the van samrakshyan samiti is facing a crisis with the emergence of factional politics.
Initially all sections had an equal say in the decision-making process; now the power is mainly
concentrated in the hands of the upper caste group. The committee now lacks a strong leadership.
Since regeneration and the consequent rise in the value of the resource, positions in the forest
management committee are viewed as positions of power and the committee has been reshuffled
and important seats occupied by inexperienced young people belonging to the dominant caste.
556 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Encroachment
Encroachment of the common grazing land and its subsequent conversion to agricultural land is
causing tension between two castes of the village.
Local politics, differential penalty for powerful sections and weaker sections (with weaker sections
playing a higher cost), ineffective action in some cases of tree felling, etc. are among the things
that have caused resentment within the community. This has also affected the overall unity of the
village, threatening the long-term sustainability of the initiative.
Realising these problems, in 2001 the village committee decided to meet and take corrective
action. This reflects the maturity of the village and a desire to bring about positive change.
Information on subsequent developments could not be ascertained.

This case study has been compiled from two documents, references for which follow. We are
grateful to Vasundhara, a Bhubaneshwar based NGO for further clarifications and comments
on the case study.
Satyasundar Barik, ‘A small green village in Orissa’, Humanscape, December 2001.
Vasundhara, ‘Devolution of Forest Management: Creating Spaces for Community Action for Forest
Management – A case study of Suruguda Village, Sundargarh District, Orissa’ (Bhubaneshwar,
Vasundhara, 2001).

For more detail contact:

Vasundhara
Plot No. 15
Sahid Nagar, Bhubbneshwar 751007
Tel: 0674 2542011/12
Email: vasundharanr@satyam.net.in

Endnotes
1
A rotational system of forest protection, where the patrolling party carries sticks (thenga) with them. After finishing
the patrol the thengas are placed near the doors of the people who are expected to go patrolling the next day.
Punjab
Punjab: Socio-cultural and religious practices in
biodiversity conservation
Neelima Jerath, Puja Ahluwalia, and Arshdeep Kaur

1. Background
1.1. Geographic profile
The state of Punjab (lying between 29º31’ and 32º32’ N latitude and 73º54’ and 76º50’ E longitude)
is a tiny segment of land that is almost entirely cultivated. Since its reorganisation, first in 1947, and
subsequently in 1966, the state has lost a major chunk of its natural forest cover to neighbouring
states and has been forced to use its natural resources intensively.

1.2. Ecological profile

With the advent of the green revolution, Punjab attained the distinction of being the grain bowl
of the country. This sobriquet, however, also points to an adversely affected ecological balance.
The monotony of well-tended fields is broken here and there in patches, by watercourses, wetlands
and sand dunes. The north of the state is characterised by an elongated, green and undulating
stretch of land—the Shivaliks—an area with the maximum concentration of the state’s biodiversity.
A study of the history of traditional land-use practices in the state indicates that in an effort
to produce more grain, the production and area under cultivation of legumes (like groundnut
and pulses) and coarse cereals (like , bajra and corn) has decreased drastically in the last 3–4
decades. Dependence on high-yielding varieties has also led to decreasing intra-specific diversity
of wheat and rice, the principle crops in the state. Another major factor which has contributed to
the destruction of biodiversity and disruption of traditional agroforestry systems is the large-scale
felling of fruit, fuelwood and other native trees by farmers themselves at the time of consolidation
of land holdings in Punjab.

1.3. Socio-economic profile

Punjab is a predominantly agricultural economy. As per the 2001 census, its population is 24.36
million, two-thirds of which was in rural areas.1 60 per cent of the population is Sikh, 37 per cent
Hindu, and there are very small Muslim, Christian, Jain, and Buddhist minorities.2
Traditional societies all over the world value a large number of species for food, fibre, shelter,
medicine and other economic and aesthetic uses. Though perhaps unaware of the underlying
scientific principles as stated in modern terms, these societies have a deep-rooted understanding
and practical experience of the ramifications of ecological linkages in nature. This wise human-
nature linkage has motivated these societies to conserve and sustainably use their natural resources
over the ages.

2. A history of administrative control

state chapter - punjab

over land and resources

Punjab has for centuries been a centre of human activities such
as pastoralism and agriculture. A study by the Forest Department
of reports and genealogical tables of various villages of eastern
Punjab indicates an abundance of vegetation (forests) and wildlife
in the past, particularly during the medieval period. Prior to the
middle of 18th century, the Shivalik hills were strictly preserved
for hunting, and no cultivation, grazing or exploitation of timber
were permitted. At that time the hills were covered with thick
lush acacia, shisham and pine forests with a profuse undercover
559
560 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

of shrubs and grasses. However, after the Sikh Wars in 1845–9, the Sardars and Rajas, who owned
hunting lands, were evicted, and forests were handed over to villagers for use in addition to their
village common lands. In the middle of the nineteenth century the British annexed Punjab. Lord
Dalhousie, who toured Punjab at that time, stated in 1851: ‘...there was absence of forest trees and
even fruit trees and bushes. The whole territory was a continuous stretch of unrelieved plains, but
its hilly region abounded in prolific forest and central plains were over grown with bush wood.’3 In
less than two generations unrestricted and large-scale felling of trees and overgrazing had removed
much of the natural vegetation of the forests. As the problem assumed serious proportions, the
then Provincial Government passed the Punjab Land Preservation (Choes) Act 1900 to save the
remaining vegetation of the state and to check the great damage done by the choes or seasonal
rivulets. This allowed areas to be closed to grazing, controlled the type of livestock permitted within
grazing areas, and prohibited tree felling, cultivation and quarrying. However, the implementation
of the Act remained inadequate and the situation deteriorated further after independence.

3. Towards community conservation

Despite dramatic pressures on land resources in the state, there still exist islands of conserved
areas maintained by traditional communities known for their tradition of kar seva or self-help. The
conservation and equitable use of shamlat (land with common property rights for local communities);
the development and afforestation of phirnies (village peripheral roads), and community conserved
village pasturelands and ponds are extensions of the same traditions.
In 19th-century Punjab, customary rules jointly designed by user communities allowed conflicts
over critical resources to be minimized. These rules and regulations allowed pastoralists and
farmers to turn ‘open access’ forests and pasturelands into a system of controlled ‘common access’
resources. These joint management systems extended not only to the specific common lands of
the agricultural villages (shamlat-deh) but also to regional commons situated in the marshes of the
flood plains (chhambs), in upland ridges (bar) between rivers, in lowland riparian tracts (belas), in
grazing runs of the forested hills of the Lower Shivaliks, and in the alpine meadows of the Upper
Himalayas. Communal management did not rely upon state intervention, but rather upon the
mutual need for secure access to forests and grasslands.

3.1. Protection of wildlife and trees by the Bishnois of Abohar4

The Bishnois practice a religion initiated by their Guru, Jambeshwar (or Jambaji), in which
conservation plays a key role. Jambaji propagated 29 tenets,5 two of which involved bans on
‘the felling of any green tree’ and ‘the killing of any animal or bird’. Hence, the Bishnois actively
protect wildlife and do not permit hunting or felling of trees in their area (see Abohar case study
for details).
The All India Jeev Raksha Bishnoi Sabha in Abohar area (district Ferozepur) of Punjab was
founded in 1974 by Sant Kumar Bishnoi and began working towards the conservation of blackbuck,
the state animal. The Sabha does not permit hunting in areas under its sphere of influence.
The efforts of the Sabha have resulted in maintaining the number of blackbucks at about 4,000 in
the area for the past one decade (Anonymous, 1989; Bishnoi, 2001). In recognition of the efforts
of the Sabha, the state government declared a 70 sq km area as the Abohar Wildlife Sanctuary in
1975 under the Wildlife Protection Act, 19726(see Abohar case study for details).
Some of the problems faced by the Bishnois in their conservation efforts are:
1. Despite a Bishnoi protest, a broad water drainage channel has been constructed in the area,
dividing it into two parts. This has restricted the movement of blackbuck in the sanctuary and
could adversely affect their distribution and reproductive habits.
2. The increase in the number of blue bulls sometimes leads
to destruction of standing crops in the fields. The community
allows blackbucks to feed on their fields, considering it as a
religious donation. They also believe that the crops sprout
better if grazed by blackbuck. However, increasing pressure
on land (due to increased requirement of foodgrains for the
growing population, conversion of crop areas into orchards and
division of land holdings with increasing family size) has led to a
conflict situation with animals, especially blue bulls or nilgai, for
 Punjab 561

which there is no natural predator in the area. This conflict is more pronounced in the case
of the younger generations of Bishnois, who may be less tolerant of wildlife-caused damage.

3. Since the Bishnois do not kill any type of animal, increasing numbers of stray dogs in the sanctuary
pose a serious threat to the blackbuck. Effective methods to control the dog population in the
area need to be devised. Due to financial and language constraints the community is unable to
spread its message to a wider audience.

3.2. Protection and equitable use of Shamlat lands in the Northern

Shivaliks by the Gaddi and Gujjar tribes
Shamlat lands in the villages of Punjab have traditionally served as a common property resource
for local communities. The shamlats of the Northern Shivaliks (Himalayan foothills) are interesting
because they do not rely on the ‘one village, one forest’ self-sufficiency model, but integrate the
needs of diverse communities, including farmers, graziers from the plains (Gujjars), and graziers
from the hills (Gaddis). The Gaddis migrate to the upper Himalayas in summer and visit the
area every winter and share pasturelands with the locals. The Gujjars visit the area during rabi
harvesting.
In 1961 it was estimated that over 3,840 sq km of Shamlat forests were still in existence in the
lower Siwaliks, representing much of Punjab’s remaining forest resources.7 The Shahpur Kandi
comprised a part of the Shivalik Forest, which covered over 26,800 ha of low hills. Ownership
of Shahpur Kandi vested in the village co-proprietary body, which was a kind of local institution
established in some villages in Punjab. These exist even today in the form of panchayats, composition
of which is varied. In the past, the elderly farmers would usually choose the members of this body,
but now proper elections are held to form panchayats. Reservation of rights of the Gaddi shepherds
and Gujjar herdsmen was acknowledged. During the early 19th century, the government claimed
ownership of trees and the right to collect the grazing fees from the Gaddis.8

3.2.1. Institutional structures

Management systems regulating use are based on complementary needs and reciprocal
arrangements between users, optimally utilizing the inherent characteristics of different ecological
niches. Traditional mechanisms of shamlat use were developed in order to minimize conflicts
between users, while ensuring sustained availability of critical resources. Extraction and use of
timber, fodder and fibre grasses were regulated and conserved through rules monitored by user
groups. The needs of both the pastoralists, who are dependent on a range of forest species, and
the sedentary farming communities were accommodated, as the scale of their operations and
resource requirements were very different from each other.9
In the 19th century, people in the plains, valleys and the lower hills specialized in cultivation of
lands, while people of the less fertile upper hills and mountains depended on pastoral resources.
Neither region could be completely independent of the other. While the plains faced long droughts
with highly erratic rains, flash floods, and volatile river action during the monsoons, the upper hills
had heavy rain throughout the monsoons as well as severe winters. The Shivalik region occupied a
midway position. It provided pasturage and forest vegetation as well as land for cultivation, acting
as a common resource pool. A symbiotic relationship thus grew up between the two groups of
users: the sedentary cultivators and the nomadic pastoralists.
Movements of pastoralists included regular seasonal movements before the monsoons, in winter
after the kharif and in summer after the rabi harvest, as well as stress movements during floods,
droughts, scarcities and famines. The Gaddi shepherds came from the alpine ranges of the upper
state chapter - punjab

Himalayas in the winters and the villages gave them food, shelter and pastures. The Gujjars came
from the plains at the time of the rabi harvesting. The sedentary cultivators alternated the pastures
between fields under short fallows (banjar jadisd) and several categories of the uncultivated long
fallows (banjar kadim) kept as the shamlat-deh or the ‘village commons’. Cattle owners entrusted
their livestock to graziers who moved with them in large herds (gols), across arid tracks, through
the riverine and forest fallows and the hills. The Shivalik forests served as seasonal commons and
were treated as reserves, providing pastures throughout the year for the livestock of the nomads
from the mountains and plains as well as for the livestock of local farming communities in times of
need. Natural ecological principles thus provided the basis for complex land-use patterns.
562 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

3.2.2. Current status

Over the past several decades, community forest management systems
have been affected by partition of the village commons (caused by the sale
of large chunks of land by large farmers to smaller farmers for money), by
privatization and by irrigation, which has led to double- and triple-cropping,
effectively shortening the period for which agricultural lands can be used for
grazing. Similarly, state intervention and statutory land reforms after 1947
have diluted the authority of local institutions of community control over
both land use and property rights in general and forest rights in particular.
Whereas earlier each member of the community had equal responsibilities
and shared equal benefits, under the state-sponsored system a hierarchy
was created at local panchayat level, leading at times to the alienation of
the common person.
Pastoralists have been marginalised in the agrarian system and their
relationship with sedentary cultivators has become strained. The role of the
different communities as partners in a participatory management effort has
been threatened, and, as a consequence, their commitment to managing
biodiversity and sustaining tree and grass cover has been eroded. The impact
of this institutional breakdown on common access to resources like forests
has been worsened further by government intrusions and by the urban-based
private sector. Hence, presently one hardly finds community participation in
conservation of bio-resources in the area. Such systems need to be revived to
encourage people-centred conservation of bio-resources.

3.3. Community participation in a watershed

management project in Relmajra
The resource base of the Shivaliks is increasingly faced with degradation due to the over-
exploitation of hill vegetation by humans and livestock. As agriculture is mainly rain-fed with
poor yields, the farming community has a depressed economic base. In order to combat this, an
integrated watershed development model has been initiated with peoples’ participation by the
Central Soil & Water Conservation Research and Training Centre, Chandigarh.
Under the project, a Water Users’ Association (a registered society), later known as ‘Hill Resource
Management Society’, was constituted in Village Relmajra, District Ropar. The HRMS included the
head of every family living in the village. This hilly catchment area was treated using soil and water
conservation measures, besides planting of local trees and grasses. Contour trenches were dug on
the slopes to promote in-situ moisture conservation and a 14 m-high earthen dam (with storage
capacity of 13 ha m in 3 ha spread area) was constructed. The main responsibilities of the HRMS
are as under:
1. Protection of hilly areas from grazing and illicit cutting of trees, i.e. ‘social fencing’.
2. Distribution of irrigation water from dams among members equitably, at the rate to be fixed
from time to time.
3. Maintenance of dams, water conveyance systems and other assets.
4. Utilization of society’s funds for welfare activities in the village.
The project has led to local rainwater harvesting and has resulted in increased water availability.
The community is responsible for all the activities mentioned above. The activities were monitored
by the Central Soil & Water Conservation Research Institute, Chandigarh, for 2-3 years, followed
by the community itself.
Income from water charges is utilised for dam maintenance and welfare activities. The effort
has helped increase water availability and conservation of bio-resources and has improved the
ecology of the area and the economic status of the locals. Though water has been the major driving
force, this project is a good example of community participation for bio-resource conservation in
Punjab.

3.4. Protection of Indian peafowl in a group of villages in District

Ropar
Indian peafowl were abundant in rural Punjab about fifty years ago. The loss of tree cover at the
 Punjab 563

time of consolidation of land holdings and increased use of pesticides due to the introduction of
the Green Revolution in the state has led to a decrease in availability of habitat and pesticide-
free grain for this beautiful bird. Substantial numbers can, however, still be sighted in five
villages (Todar Majra, Makrian, Chunni Khurad, Makar and Majatri) of Ropar district. Amar
Kaur of Todar Majra village informed us of an age-old community initiative directed towards
conserving this beautiful bird (see Todar Majra case study for details).

3.5. Forest conservation in areas around the Mahantan Wala Choe

and the Rodian da Dera
Between Maili and Janjjon in Ropar Shivaliks lie the Mahanta Wala Choe (The saints rivulet) and
the Rodian da Dera (The abode of the nuns). In these, a strict religious code of conduct was known
to exist that prohibited locals from using resources from a small portion of forest which harboured
rich biodiversity. The locals in the area tell stories of rich biodiversity pockets where no hunting
or even plucking of plant parts was allowed. This tradition is, however, gradually diminishing with
time. During preparation of the Punjab Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan10, the authors visited
the site but could not find any such area. According to the locals, the younger generation has now
abandoned these traditions due to change in attitudes and have lost the traditional values.

3.6. The cleaning of Kali Bein waters through Kar Seva

The Kali Bein11 water was used by the locals for drinking and other purposes in the past. However,
the bein has silted and the water quality has deteriorated over the years. Baba Balbir Singh and his
dera (the ‘abode’ where the sage lives along with his disciples) at Sainchewal village (Kapurthala
district) initiated kar seva (community labour effort) intended to de-silt the rivulet in the Sultanpur-
Lodhi area (extending from Gurudwara Sant Ghat to Gurdwara Ber Sahib), to increase water flow
and to improve water quality. The initiative has also led to the improvement in aquatic biodiversity
of the area.

4. Conclusions
On the basis of the above case studies of Punjab, it can be concluded that the concept and practice
of maintenance of common property resources and biodiversity though community participation
are scientifically and socially valid. Traditionally people have known that they are a part of the
ecosystem in which they live, and that they have to manage their resources appropriately for
survival. What needs to be done is to apply contemporary scientific knowledge and dispassionately
study people’s traditional habits and practices so as to support and improve on the usefulness
of these practices for appropriate ecological management. Further, similar efforts need to be
promoted in other areas as well through appropriate awareness, education and training.
However, community conservation efforts in the state face serious challenges:
• Changes in the attitudes of people, especially the younger generation, which is more materialistic
in approach and has virtually no regard for traditional values.
• Emphasis of the state government on developmental activities like promotion of agriculture and
industry with scant respect for environment and traditional conservation practices.
• Emphasis on agriculture (84 per cent of land is under agriculture and HYVs).
• Lack of awareness of environmental issues in development departments, and unplanned and
inappropriate increase of new technology.
state chapter - punjab

Neelima Jairath is the Principal Scientific Officer (Environment) and Arshdeep Kaur is Junior
Research Fellow at the Punjab State Council for Science & Technology (PSCST). Pooja Ahluwalia
is currently with the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore.

Endnotes
1
http://www.censusindia.net/t_00_003.html
2
http://www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Religiondata_2001.xls
564 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory
3
S.P. Mittal, R.K. Aggarwal and J.S. Sharma (eds), Fifty Years of Research on Sustainable Resource Management in
Shivaliks by Central Soil and Water Conservation Research and Training Institute (Chandigarh, CSWCRTI, 2000).
4
Anonymous, ‘Blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra) census in Abohar Sanctuary (Ferozepur), Punjab in 1988-89’, Report
by Department of Forest & Wildlife, Haryana (1989); Maniram Bishnoi, Vanya Jeevan ev Vrikshon ki Raksharth
Bishnoion Ke Saake’ (in Hindi), Amar Jyoti. Vol 52 No. 2-3: 2 (2001).
5
The name Bishnoi means twenty-niners, or followers of twenty-nine rules.
6
As of 2006, it is reported that the state government is considering converting the sanctuary into a community
reserve, a new category of protected area brought into the Wild Life (Protection) Act in its 2003 amendment.
7
Minoti Chakravarty-Kaul, ‘Durability in diversity: Community managed forests in NW India’, The Administrator. Vol.
XLI: 29-51 (1996).
8
Mittal et al., Fifty Years of Research. (As above)
9
Minoti Chakravarty-Kaul, Common Lands and Customary Law. Institutional Change in North India over Past Two
Centuries (Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1996).
10
Part of the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan process of the Ministry of Environment and Forests,
Government of India; see TPCG and Kalpavriksh, Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report of the National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (Pune/Delhi, Kalpavriksh, 2005).
11
A rivulet feeding the Satluj river.
 CCA/Punjab/CS1/Ferozpur/Abohar/Species protection

Abohar Wildlife Sanctuary, Ferozpur

Background
The Bishnoi community occupying parts of Rajasthan, Punjab and Haryana is known for the
absolute protection they offer to the blackbuck and the khejari tree, as also protection of other plant
and animal diversity within their village boundaries. Khejari is a multipurpose legume tree valued
by the villagers for its pod (used as food), leaves (used as fodder and manure) and branches (used
as construction material). Blackbuck and chinkara have on the other hand been placed in Schedule
I of the Wildlife Protection Act because of their high conservation value. The habitat at Abohar is
represented by semi-arid plains with scattered sand dunes, acacia trees, beri bushes and weeds.
The dominant flora is Acacia nilotica, Dalbergia sisso, Prosopis cineraria and shrubs include jungli
ber and species of cacti and succulents. The fauna includes Indian peafowl, partridges, black-
naped hare, jungle cat, nilgai, etc. The Bishnois are largely a farming community with fairly large
landholdings; they meet most of their biomass requirements from their own fields. The dependence
on the surrounding forest is not very high. After the construction of Rajasthan Canal and Bikaner
Canal by the government, this area has plenty of water and is being cultivated with wheat, gram,
bajra, jowar, etc. Large landholders keep about 10–12 buffaloes and cattle per family, whereas the
landless keep around 2 goats or cattle per family. Some families also keep camels.
The area which has been declared a sanctuary is mostly birani or sandy land. No agriculture is
generally done here. This habitat is ideal for the blackbucks and chinkaras.

Towards community conservation

Conservation plays a key role in the religion practiced by the Bishnois. Their religion was initiated
by their Guru Jambeshwar (or Jambaji) about 500 years ago. The guru propagated 29 tenets,
giving his followers the name ‘Bishnoi’ or ‘twenty-niners’. Two of the main tenets are ‘ban on the
felling of any green tree’ and ‘ban on the killing of any animal or bird’. Hence, the Bishnois actively
protect wildlife and do not permit hunting or felling of trees in their area.
It is said that in 1730 the Maharaja of Jodhpur ordered his men to fetch timber for his lime-kilns
from a Bishnoi area. The local people, led by a woman, Attri Devi, hugged the trees to save them
from the axe-men, and about 363 of them, mostly women and children, were hacked to death
before the king’s men gave up. With a history like that, the sect goes to great lengths to conserve
their wildlife. This is evident from the incidents like that of film actor Salman Khan being chased
and apprehended by the villagers for hunting a blackbuck in their area. Bishnoi lands stand apart
as oases in the largely degraded landscape of Punjab and Haryana and in the vastness of the Thar
Desert of Rajasthan.
The All India Jeev Raksha Bishnoi Sabha in Abohar (Dist. Ferozepur) area of Punjab was founded
in 1974 by Shri Sant Kumar Bishnoi and began working towards conservation of blackbuck, the
state animal. The Sabha does not permit hunting in areas under their influence. The Sabha also
organises seminars and public meetings from time to time for their own children and for people
from surrounding villages in order to explain the ecological links between wildlife and humans.
Attempts are made at these meetings to motivate others to adopt conservation and sustainable
development practices.
In recognition of the efforts of the Sabha, the state government
case studies - punjab

declared a 70 sq km area as a Wildlife Sanctuary in 1975 under

the Wild life Protection Act, 1972. Also under Govt. Notification
No. 40/4/98/Ft-IV/11505 dated 7/9/2000, all rights of local people
except for hunting, shooting, killing or capturing wild birds and
animals have been allowed to continue under section 24 (c) of the
Wildlife Protection Act (as amended in 1991). Located in Ferozpur
district of Punjab, the sanctuary includes 13 Bishnoi villages of
Rajanwati, Raipur, Rampura, Bishanpura, Narainpur, Wazidpur,
Himmatpur, Seetoguno, Mahrana, Khairpur, Dotaranwali, Sukhchain
and Surdarpur, and and 3 closed areas (Gumjal, Panniwala and
Haripura). The uniqueness of the sanctuary lies in the fact that the
565
566 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

entire area within the confines of the sanctuary is under private ownership. According to the state
forest department staff, the involvement of the forest department in the management of this
sanctuary is nearly non-existent.1 Since the area is protected by the Bishnois, villagers have been
provided with guns by the department to guard the animals from poachers.
The Forest Department is under severe funding constraints with practically no money for protection
and other activities in Abohar Sanctuary. The Bishnoi Sabha regularly helps the FD officials with
night patrolling. They also provide the FD with jeeps and armed volunteers when needed. Bishnois
have frequently requested the government to provide more staff and resources to the FD so that
they can effectively patrol the area and control poaching. In 2001, a decision was taken by the
state that weapons confiscated by the state police under judicial orders will be handed over to
the wildlife staff in PAs in Punjab.2 Whether this order was actually implemented is not known.
In the year 2000, the then Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment, Mrs. Maneka Gandhi,
had promised the Bishnoi Sabha support for establishing a veterinary hospital to treat animals
and birds in Abohar Wildlife Sanctuary. She had reportedly offered a grant of Rs 25 lakh for the
purpose, along with land for the hospital and an additional amount of Rs 5 lakh for an ambulance.
The current status of this project is also unknown.3

Impacts of community effort

The efforts of the Sabha have resulted in maintaining a high population of blackbucks. In 2000,
about 4,000 blackbucks were counted in the sanctuary.4 The Bishnois conserve all kinds of flora
and fauna in their area, and because of their efforts the villages and surroundings are green oases
in the desert, with Indian peafowl, chinkaras and blackbuck, nilgais and other animals roaming
freely and even approaching people fearlessly.

Opportunities and constraints faced

Conservation of ungulates like the blackbucks comes with its own set of problems. These animals
cause significant damage to the standing crop. The community appears to be more tolerant of the
damage caused by the blackbuck as compared to the other animals, since they consider this loss
as a religious donation. They also believe that the crops sprout better if grazed by blackbuck.
However, increasing pressure on land (due to increased requirement of foodgrains for the growing
population, conversion of crop areas into orchards and division of landholdings with increasing
family size) have led to conflict situation with animals, especially the nilgai, for which there is no
natural predator in the area. Reportedly, this conflict is slowly beginning to weaken the Bishnois’
commitment to protecting the animals. They still would not think of killing them but they do shoo
them away from their own fields, with their neighbours probably shooing them back!5
Since the Bishnois do not kill any animal, the increasing numbers of feral dogs in the sanctuary
poses a serious threat to the blackbuck populations. Local people feel that effective methods to
control the dog population in the area need to be devised. The dogs feed on blackbuck fawns as
they are small in size but do not attack the fawns of nilgai because of their larger size. This is
another reason for the increase in the number of nilgai as compared to the blackbuck.
A broad water-drainage channel, constructed by the irrigation department, has divided the area
into two parts despite a Bishnoi protest. This has restricted the movement of blackbuck in the
sanctuary and could adversely affect their distribution and reproductive habits. Additionally, there
is an increasing trend to establish narma and kinnow crops (orchards). Such gardens are affecting
the habitat of the blackbucks.
Despite all the above problems the community members still propagate conservation values.
They express their limitations due to financial and language constraints, which restricts them
from spreading the message of conservation to a wider audience. They are still in unison in
wholeheartedly saving the blackbucks, nilgai and green trees. But this enthusiasm seems to be
much higher among the elders in the community rather than the younger generation, who are less
tolerant towards the damages caused by the wild ungulates.
Abohar Sanctuary is currently under the process of denotification. The government intends to re-
notify the sanctuary as a ‘Community Reserve’ under the amended Wild Life Protection Act 2003,
which would mean that the local institutions would formally be handed over the responsibility to
protect and manage the sanctuary, which was not possible till now under the Act.
 Punjab 567

Conclusion
The resolve towards conservation of plants and animals despite facing serious crop damage in
Abohar is inspiring. To the best of our knowledge, this is the only example in the country where a
wildlife sanctuary has been established on land owned by a community and also the only example
where local communities have been allowed all rights within the sanctuary. The move towards
converting this to a Community Reserve is good: the local communities will then have a legal right
to protect this area and they may be able to secure some financial and other support for carrying
out various activities.

This case study was contributed by Dr. Neelima Jerath, Puja Ahluwalia, and Arshdeep Kaur, for
this Directory in 2001 and further updated in 2006. Neelima Jairath is the Principal Scientific
Officer (Environment) and Arshdeep Kaur is Junior Research Fellow at the Punjab State Council
for Science & Technology (PSCST). Pooja Ahluwalia is currently with the Indian Institute of
Management, Bangalore

For more information contact:

Shri. Hanuman Parshad Bishnoi, Secretary,
Shri Sant Kumar Bishnoi, President,
All India Jeev Rakhsha Bishnoi Sabha,
Street No. 13, Abohar, Dist. Ferozpur-152116, Punjab.
Tel No.-01634-220774/272202
Bishnoi Jeev Rakshan Sabha

Dr. Neelima Jerath and Arshdeep Kaur

Punjab State Council for Science and Technology,
Sector 26, Adjacent to Sacred Heart School, Chandigarh.
E-mail: neelimakj@yahoo.co.uk

Puja Ahluwalia,
Research Associate,
Centre for Public Policy,
Indian Institute of Management,
Bannerghatta road,
Bangalore – 560076
Email: pujaa@iimb.ernet.in

Endnotes
1
E-mail correspondence with Madhu Sarin, an independent researcher based in Chandigarh, on 23 April 2003.
2
Gurpreet Singh, ‘No weapons to keep poachers off’, The Tribune, 11 February (2001). Also in Protected Area Update:
News and Information from Protected Areas in India and South Asia, No.32, August (Kalpavriksh, Pune, 2001).
3
Anon., ‘Maneka promises hospital for sanctuary animals’, The Tribune, 11 December 2000. Also in Protected Area
Update: News and Information from Protected Areas in India and South Asia, No.32, August (Kalpavriksh, Pune,
2001).
case studies - punjab

4
Anon., ‘Black buck (Antilope cervicapra) census in Abohar Sanctuary (Ferozepur), Punjab in 1988–89’, Report by
Dept. of Forest & Wildlife (1989); Maniram Bishnoi, ‘Vanya Jeevan ev Vrikshon ki Raksharth Bishnoion Ke Saake’
(Hindi), Amar Jyoti, Vol. 52, No. 2-3: 2-13 (2001).
5
E-mail correspondence with Madhu Sarin, an independent researcher based in Chandigarh, on 23 April 2003.
 CCA/Punjab/CS2/Ropar/Todar Majra and others/species protection

Todar Majra, Makrian, Chunni Khurad, Makar

and Majatri villages, Ropar
Background
Indian peafowl, the national bird of India, was found in abundance in rural areas of Punjab about
fifty years ago. The state’s natural vegetation (which included fields interspersed with horticulture
trees and dense ever green native trees) provided a suitable habitat for its feeding and roosting.
However, the loss of tree cover at the time of consolidation of land holdings (see the state chapter
on Punjab for details) and increased use of pesticides during the Green Revolution in the state has
led to decrease in availability of habitat and pesticide-free grain for this beautiful bird. In spite of
this, the bird can still be sighted in great numbers in 4–5 villages in Ropar District. These villages
are Todar Majra, Makrian, Chunni Khurad, Makar and Majatri. These villages are adjacent to each
other and cover a total area of nearly 404.8 ha.

Towards community conservation

As informed by Amar Kaur of village Todar Majra, the villagers are protecting Indian peafowl
since ancient times. They do not allow anybody to take away or kill these birds in their area. The
community has planted a number of mango trees to give breeding, roosting and nesting places to
the birds, and they allow them to feed on the grain in the fields. Every villager provides shelter to
these birds on their rooftops, in open yards or in the gardens, and keeps large bowls of water and
grain for them. Indian peafowl can be seen moving freely in large numbers in the area and local
villagers do not mind their presence even if they destroy the crops (especially fields of spinach,
pulses, pea, raya, fenugreek, chillies, etc.) out of love and close association with the birds.
Another reason for protection of the birds, besides their beauty, is that these birds feed on small
snakes and insects from the fields. Religion also plays a key role in protection as the feathers,
shed by these birds once a year, are used for decoration in the local gurudwara and temple for
making the chaura fan over the Guru Granth Sahib1 by the Sikh community. Hindus in the area
also consider the birds sacred.
According to a local villager, Paramjit Singh Grewal, the birds are considered residents of the village
and thus the villagers protect the birds as they would any other member of the community.

Impacts of community effort

As a result of the villagers’ efforts, about 400 Indian peafowl have been protected in Todar Majra
village alone, which has an area of 500 acres (202.4 ha) and a human population of around 700
persons.

Opportunities and constraints

Despite the best of community efforts, some problems do crop up.
Trees in certain areas are being cut from the panchayat lands by certain influential people in the
village, thus destroying the nesting and roosting sites of these birds.
case studies - punjab

In recent years, due to excessive use of chemical fertilizers in the fields, some Indian peafowl
have died due to pesticide poisoning. However, in the recent times some motivated and slightly
educated individuals who have come to know about the negative effects of chemical fertilizers have
begun motivating the rest of the villagers to use less of them.

568
 Punjab 569

Conclusion
In spite of the above problems, the number of Indian peafowl has increased in the village over
the past 40–50 years and the whole community is very proud of its efforts. However it is very clear
from this case study that excessive use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides in the farms of the
farmers is a great threat to birds and animals.

This case study was contributed by Dr. Neelima Jerath, Puja Ahluwalia, and Arshdeep Kaur, for
this Directory in 2001 and further updated in 2006. Neelima Jairath is the Principal Scientific
Officer (Environment) and Arshdeep Kaur is Junior Research Fellow at the Punjab State Council
for Science & Technology (PSCST). Pooja Ahluwalia is currently with the Indian Institute of
Management, Bangalore.

For more information contact:

Shri. Paramjit Singh Garewal
Farmer,
Village Todar Majra, P/O Majatri,
Ropar, Punjab
Tel. No. 01888-2250043, 2250547

Dr. Neelima Jerath and Arshdeep Kaur

Punjab State Council for Science and Technology,
Sector 26, Adjacent to Sacred Heart School, Chandigarh.
E-mail: neelimakj@yahoo.co.uk

Puja Ahluwalia
Research Associate,
Centre for Public Policy,
Indian Institute of Management,
Bannerghatta road,
Bangalore – 560076
Email: pujaa@iimb.ernet.in

Endnotes
1
The religious book of the Sikh community.

case studies - punjab

Rajasthan
Rajasthan: Tales of co-existence

Sandeep Khanwalkar

1. Background
1.1. Geographic profile
The State of Rajasthan was formed in 1950 and, at 342,239 sq km, is the largest state in India.
It is bordered on the west and northwest by Pakistan, and by the states of Punjab, Haryana, Uttar
Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat on the other sides. The topography is dominated by the
Aravalli Mountains, running across the state, with the highest point at Guru Shikhar on Mount Abu.
The Aravallis are rich in natural resources, including minerals. The southeastern part of the state
is dominated by the uplands east of the Aravalli Range. The southern parts are heavily forested,
but generally the state is thinly covered by vegetation, consisting of large areas of sandstone and
of masses of rose-colored quartzite. The uplands are wide and stony, with a sandy central region.
The valleys extend for many miles and the flattened hilltops form small plateaus.
Teak, dhok, acacia and bamboo grow on the lower slopes, and grasslands and pastures are
found on the hilltops. The south-eastern pathar (Hadoti Plateau) covers the eastern part along the
Chambal River. Over half the geographical area of the state is occupied by the Great Indian Desert
(Thar Desert). Covering 209,000 sq km, it is bordered by the irrigated Indus plain to the west,
the Aravalli Range to the southeast and the Rann of Kachchh to the south. Several saline lakes,
locally known as dhands, are scattered throughout the region. The Aravallis form Rajasthan’s most
important watershed. The major rivers in the state are the Chambal, Banas and Banganga.1

1.2. Ecological profile

The state mainly has scrub jungle, and towards the west there are plants characteristic of arid
zones. Large trees are found mainly in the Aravallis
and in eastern Rajasthan. The desert vegetation is
mostly herbaceous or stunted scrub; on the hills
acacias and euphorbias may be found. Khejari tree
grows throughout the plains. Rohida is another
economically useful tree of the state. Grasses form
the main natural resource of the desert. Tigers
are found in the Aravallis. Leopards, sloth bears,
sambhar and chital occur in the hills, while nilgai,
blackbuck and gazelles are numerous in the plains.
Several migratory waterfowl are known to visit
the state. The desert is the home of the vanishing
Great Indian Bustard. The chinkara is the state
animal, while the Great Indian Bustard is the state
bird. The state has 23 wildlife sanctuaries and four
state chapter - rajasthan

national parks (Keoladeo, Ranthambhor, Sariska

and the proposed Desert National Park).2 Of these,
Ranthambhor and Sariska are also Tiger Reserves.

1.3. Socio-economic profile

As per the 2001 census, Rajasthan had a
population of 56.5 million, nearly 77 per cent
of which was rural.3 Almost 89 per cent of the
population is Hindu, about 8 per cent Muslim, and
Deciduous forests of Kumbhalgarh Sanctuary the rest are Jain, Christian, Sikh and Buddhist
Photo: Ashish Kothari
573
574 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

minorities.4 Though small in terms of overall proportion of the state’s population, Rajasthan has
one of India’s largest number of Jains, which may partly account for a strong vegetarian tendency
amongst the population. Of the total population, about 17 per cent are scheduled castes, and
almost 13 per cent scheduled tribes.
The population of the state includes numerous indigenous groups: minas, banjaras, bheels,
gadia lohars, kalbelias, garasias, sahariyas and rebaris (the cattle breeders). Communities like
rebari, gadia lohar, bhaat and banjara still follow nomadic lifestyles. Rebaris and gujjars migrate
with their livestock, usually every monsoon, from the western parts of the state to the eastern
parts. Although most of its area is arid or semi-arid, Rajasthan has a large livestock population5
and is the largest wool-producing state.6 It has a monopoly in camels and in draught animals of
various breeds.7

2. A brief history of administrative control over land and

resources
In the pre-independence era, Rajasthan was divided into several small and large princely
states, each governed by separate laws. At that time forests were largely defined as natural and
community forests. Natural forests were large expanses of forest owned by local rulers. Villagers
were allowed to meet their basic needs from this category of forests. Commercial use was strictly
prohibited. Community forests belonged to the village, but they were not allowed to destroy the
forest. Commercial use of community forests was also not permitted. These forests were small in
size and were only able to fulfil the villager’s small requirements like fuel wood, grass, fruits etc.
In the British districts of Ajmere (now Ajmer) and Merwara (now Udaipur, Rajsamand and Bhilwara)
all ‘wastelands’ had been handed over to local inhabitants, with the government relinquishing all
rights over these lands by the Settlement Act of 1850. The practical results of this policy, dictated
though it was by the highest motives, were disastrous. The hills and other wastelands had become
denuded, the wood was used up, what timber there was had been sold, and these lands were for
the most part utterly barren. During the drought of 1867 and 1868 all grass on these hillsides dried
up, and cattle perished or had to be driven away.8
Alwar was an independent state, having a protection treaty with the British, and had about 12
per cent of its territory under forest cover at the turn of the century. Till 1901, the state maintained
roondhs (fodder reserves, grasslands in the valleys/ plains) and banis (areas where trees were
reserved for state use). After the state’s needs were met, these areas were opened for adjacent
villages to extract basic requirements such as wood for ploughs, etc. In addition there were
lands under the management of the village bodies for resources such as shrubs, grasses, wood,
etc. However, after a land settlement in 1872, the area under roondhs and banis was gradually
extended by taking over more and more of the village commons on the pretext that the village
cattle entered the state reserves. This created conflicts between the state and the villagers, which
was further intensified after the state started maintaining a cavalry regiment, thus increasing its
fodder requirements. As fodder scarcity increased, so did the boundary conflicts. In 1899 a Forest
Boundary Commission was established to investigate these conflicts. As per the recommendations
of the commission, the disputed land was returned to the villagers.
In 1901, the forest department was constituted, after which the informal access of the local
people to government land was severely restricted and forests came under stricter and more
rigid rules and regulations. In many villages the FD took over the village commons. The FD had
a tendency to bring more and more area under its control and charge higher grazing fees. The
forests were one of the highest sources of revenue for the state. After the settlements of the Indian
Forest Act, 1927, lands for each village were clearly demarcated. It is said that felling of trees
was less before 1934 and people could still extract dry wood and small timber for domestic needs.
World War II resulted in enhanced timber felling.9 The demarcation and settlement of reserved
forests was completed by 1940 but a majority of the cases relating to protected forests could not
be disposed of till the princely states merged into Rajasthan. By this time most of the state forests
has been felled. After the abolition of the jagirdari10 system in 1959 (under the Rajasthan Biswedari
Abolition Act 1959), large areas came under the control of the government, but their control had
to be taken over by the FD from the Revenue Department. Before the Act came into force, most
jagirdars had sold their forests and the areas were clear-felled. The Rajasthan Forest Act was
enacted in 1953, under which the forest areas were demarcated and settled and regulations made
for their management. The forests which could not be classified, such as the jagirdari forests, were
then called ‘unclassed forests’, and have since been classified as protected forests.11
 Rajasthan 575

Management and control of the community pastures was transferred to panchayats,12 but
ownership lay with government. As time passed and grazing pressures increased, the forests were
degraded. Pastures were also allotted for mining operations, which affected them severely. As
owners of pastureland, panchayats were unable to establish effective systems of management.
The panchayats’ loose control motivated vested interests to begin encroaching the commons.
Inadequate policy for removing encroachments saw vested interests taking ownership of these
lands, as getting pattas (land ownership deeds) for encroached lands was easy. This became
a common practice and most community pastures are today either severely encroached or in a
degraded condition.
The Aravalli Sacred Grove Conservation Programme, a programme to restore the sacred groves of
the Aravalli hills, was launched by the Udaipur Forest Division in 1992. The programme involves the
protection of groves, planting of indigenous species, soil and water conservation, and participatory
approaches to restoration. Moria Ka Khuna is a good example of conservation and development
by FD. This sacred grove is located inside the forest in Udaipur. It has the best bamboo clumps
in the Aravallis, in terms of clump dimensions and clump area. A bamboo plantation has been
raised in the adjoining 50 ha of land to extend the area of the grove.13 In some areas, new sacred
groves were developed in consultation with local communities, but in others local people were not
informed of the new boundaries, bringing the ‘success’ of this programme into doubt. There has
been no replication of programmes like Aravalli Sacred Groves Conservation in other districts of
Rajasthan.
In parts of Western Rajasthan, the forest department has also developed some orans
(sacred groves; see section 3.1.3) under the Desert Development Programme. However, the
implementation of the programme was restricted to only a few pockets. In addition, some banis in
Rajsamand district were developed by the forest department, but this also remained restricted to
only one pocket. Such efforts are to be appreciated but are not sufficient to protect the tradition
of conservation at community level. In most of these efforts the local institutions play little or
no role in the conservation of these areas. In Rajasthan various programmes (e.g., Integrated
Watershed Development Programme (IWDP), 1991; Drought Prone Area Development Programme
(DPAP), 1974-75; and Desert Development Programme (DDP) 1977-78, funded by the central
government) have been implemented to conserve and develop village commons. However, most
of these programmes could not meet the objectives for which they were envisaged.

3. Elements of community conservation

The concept of togetherness and security for livelihood has helped develop community based
resource management systems. Dependence on natural resources for livelihood options leads to
resource conservation efforts by communities at different levels.
The people of Rajasthan have always viewed themselves as part of a system, intricately linked
to their fellow creatures, whether trees, birds, streams, or even rocks. Many of these natural
elements are revered and protected as sacred totems. Entire patches of forests, or pools in river
courses, or ponds may be considered sacred and accorded protection against exploitation. Such
age-old traditions of nature conservation have played an important role in conserving India’s
heritage of biodiversity.14
In arid areas with little forest cover, communities developed management systems based on
individually owned resources like trees, beed (private lands protected by individuals for grass
and fuel wood), community pastures, johad paithan,15 etc., while residents of the Aravalli and
Vindhya ranges, who were more dependent on the forest for their livelihoods, developed systems
based on the conservation of common resource pools. Brandis wrote in 1870 of
territory belonging to the Thakur of Bednor, a feudatory to the Maharaja
state chapter - rajasthan

of Udaipur, of hills that were wooded, and of the state tradition

of protecting beeds. Beeds continue to exist in several parts
of Rajasthan on both private and common lands and are well
maintained by the community: Sagrun village of Rajsamand
district and some pastures of the Kailadevi Sanctuary of Karauli
district are good examples.
The history of Rajasthan is incomplete without the mention of
the bishnoi community, which has often been written about.
Community forests in Rajasthan have traditionally been used as pastures (gochar) for grazing
animals. Commercial use of common resources from community forests was strictly prohibited, but
576 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

villagers were allowed to meet small commercial and household requirements like the collection
of fuelwood and sale of gum, fruits and other non-timber forest produce (NTFP). In return for
this privilege, villagers were expected to be responsible for forest protection. Self-imposed social
regulations (e.g., open grazing is not permitted in the rainy season, watch-and-ward is conducted
on a rotational basis and token amounts are levied on each household, based on the number of
cattle owned, for harvesting of fodder) prevented their large-scale destruction. These community
forests continue to abound in Rajasthan today and are referred to by various names (oran, bani,
and dev van amongst others, discussed in detail in the sections that follow).
These traditional systems of resource conservation were developed and sustained only because
of the community’s awareness of their importance and livelihood dependence on these resources.
Regulatory systems were often woven around religious sentiment and belief.

3.1. Sacred elements in community conservation

CECOEDECON, a voluntary organisation based at Chaksu, district Jaipur, recently commissioned
a study on sacred groves.16 This was a good effort but there is a need for such efforts on a larger
scale. This study gives a brief idea about the status of sacred groves in Rajasthan.

Table 1: Status of sacred groves in Rajasthan17

District Number of groves

Barmer 253
Banswara 18
Chittorgarh 83
Dungarpur 25
Jaisalmer 27
Jalor 22
Jodhpur 21
Nagaur 31
Pali 57
Rajsamand 13
Sikar 2
Sirohi 92

Udaipur 46

3.1.1. Dev van or bani

No common understanding exists on the origin of mandir van or bani (temple grove) in Rajasthan.
Hemaji, s/o Dhanaji (72 years old) of village Natudi in Ajmer district, believes that bani (and their
associated water harvesting structures) were developed to meet the fodder and drinking water
requirements of domestic and wild animals. It is also believed that during shifting cultivation,
patches of forest were left undisturbed, in which all the species found in the area were protected;
these patches ultimately became sacred groves. Because of their size and number, mandir van or
banis have been studied comparatively more than other forms of community conserved areas in
the state. Most mandir vans are rich in biodiversity: the van located in the forest patch of Dhad
Devi near Kota is renowned for being the richest in terms of biodiversity per hectare in Rajasthan.
In Hadoti (comprising the Kota, Bundi, Jhalawar and Tonk, Districts of Rajasthan), dev bani (God’s
groves) were maintained in the belief that the local deity would protect the community’s talabs
(waterbodies) and other water harvesting structures. The van was developed on the main bund of
the talab to strengthen it.18
A large patch of land downstream of the talab was also demarcated as part of the dev van to
compensate for any losses of tree growth to submergence. Only local tree species were planted in
these vans.19
 Rajasthan 577

Pandey and Singh studied the mandir vans (dev vans) or banis of Kota and Udaipur. They
divided sacred groves of the southern Aravalli ranges and Vindhyachal ranges into three major
categories. The first type of sacred groves were developed and managed by tribes, and are located
in forests, near streams or on hills. The second type was devoted to Shankara. These are located
in watershed areas. The third type consists of single trees like banyan (Ficus bengalensis), peepal
(Ficus religiosa), and so on.
Institutional structures in management
Maintenance of the vans was assured by linking them to religious sentiments. On completion of
talab construction, the pandit (local priest) would conduct a pran pratishtha (a religious ceremony)
on an auspicious day. This ceremony established an annual celebration20 in homage to the deity
residing in the van. Communities from neighbouring villages were invited to attend this function.
The grand function, apart from celebrating the successful completion of the talab and the availability
of a critical resource, was used to re-establish the area demarcated for the dev van in the presence
of all the villagers. Regulations governing management and protection of the van were discussed
and finalised in the presence of the mass gathering. These rules were never written but became
part of an oral tradition that continues to be adhered to till today. Systems of management are
site-specific and vary with communities inhabiting the area. Vans are either managed informally,
by those associated with temples or by temple Trusts. Van management committees are mostly
comprised of local people, but do include outsiders as well. The management committees are
responsible for creating and enforcing rules and regulations concerning the protection and use
of resources from the grove. However, even in instances where there are no formally defined
management committees or formally deputed guards, sacred groves are still protected and in good
condition because of unwritten rules, traditionally handed down from one generation to another.
The regulations governing the management of sacred groves throughout the state show several
similarities. Enlisted below are the rules related to the dev van of Hadoti:
• Encroachments are not permitted or tolerated.
• The van can be only used for open grazing.
• No commercial use may be derived from resources extracted from the van.
• Wood extraction (dry) is permitted only for religious function in the van.
• Green felling is not permitted.
• Vans could not be used as open toilets.
• Kulharis (axes) are not permitted to be carried in the van.
• Hunting is not permitted.
The dev van developed in the lakheta21 of the Abheda Talab in Kota is a good example of wildlife
protection and management.22 This dev van provides refuge for birds and other wildlife of the area.
The main reason behind this is that the absence of any biotic pressure in the lakheta has helped in
the natural growth of various trees and a variety of shrubs and herbs. Construction of a temple or
open platform for the local deity sanctifies the vegetation in this dev van.
Constraints and opportunities
With little ongoing conservation effort, most of the banis or mandir vans are in a considerably
degraded state. The state government too does not take much interest in protecting these groves,
and no separate records of mandir vans are maintained by the Revenue Department.
Little or no effort is made either to maintain old growth, encourage regeneration or plant new
state chapter - rajasthan

saplings in degraded areas. Most vans are currently under various threats: submergence under
talabs or tanks, clear-felling, mining and quarrying, encroachments, etc. For instance, part of
Ubeshwarji Mandir Van was destroyed by the construction of an anicut across the stream flowing
through the grove. The government constructed this anicut with little opposition from local people.
The Sagasji Dev Van on the bund of the famous Jawahar Sagar, constructed by the King of Kota
in 1790, is in need of urgent attention as the talab is now filled with the ash-waste of the National
Thermal Power Corporation, Kota.
The vans are also under tremendous pressures to meet the fodder and fuelwood requirements
of villages. Most of the youth and children of the neighbouring villagers do not know the history
behind these dev vans, and therefore little emotional attachment among the youth exists. This has
led to the erosion of traditional systems evolved for the management and maintenance of these
sacred groves: encroachments or tree felling within the groves today thus face little opposition
from local communities.
578 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

3.1.2. Kakad bani

Kakad is the name applied to areas located on the boundary of two villages. This common land
between villages was developed as community forests known as kakad banis. In many places,
kakad banis came to be linked with religion, as villagers began naming them after their local
deity. The belief that damage or misuse of the bani would incur the wrath of the gods developed
gradually within communities. Tree felling came to be considered a taboo. Resource extraction
from the area was not permitted without consensus between both village communities. The banis
were mainly used for controlled grazing and local fuelwood requirements, and also contributed to
local economies from NTFP markets.

3.1.3. Orans
Orans are sacred patches of pastureland, devoted to a god or temple. The orans of Deshnok and
Koramdesar temple are renowned in the state.
Historically, orans were developed by princely states to protect the common lands of villages.
The objective behind this was to conserve natural resources. In the arid regions of Rajasthan,
livelihoods have traditionally been based on animal husbandry. To ensure fodder availability, the
king or jagirdar of that area allotted some portion of common lands to a temple. The involvement
of the jagirdar in protection and management of the oran forced local inhabitants to conserve the
area. Religious sanctity of the oran as well as the fear of the jagirdar ensured that orans remained
protected. Orans are important components in the recharge of the aquifers in the desert, where
every single drop of water is precious. In most orans, particularly in western Rajasthan, the
dominant tree, khejari, is worshipped for its immense ecological value. Leave aside orans, people
would not cut khejari trees even from their agricultural fields. The tree enriches soil nitrogen, and,
during drought and famine, the bark of the tree is mixed with flour for consumption.23
Institutional structures in management
Orans are a very common feature in the desert areas of Rajasthan. The traditional systems for
their conservation and use are as follows:
• Felling of trees and commercial exploitation of orans are strictly prohibited. In some orans,
lopping is permitted in times of fodder scarcity, but in others it is not permitted at all.
• Orans are considered common property resources and are used as grazing lands.
• People from any caste or class can bring their cattle for grazing, but they cannot damage or cut
trees.
• People can also use NTFP resources of the oran.
• Earlier, if any person did cut a tree, that wood was confiscated and sent to the kathwada, a
community wood godown.
• The guilty party was punished and had to provide grain at the local chabutara and was also fined
a sum of money.
The orans also provided a space for adjacent villages to discuss socio-religious, economic and
cultural issues and space to air and resolve personal grievances.
Constraints and opportunities
After Independence, the jagirdari system was abolished and the ownership of oran lands vested
in the revenue department. The department could not understand the importance of orans in the
sustenance of livelihood of local inhabitants, and were as a result unable to manage them in the
traditional manner. Currently, the management of orans is under the panchayats. Panchayats,
unfortunately, are highly political institutions with artificially constituted units of communities or
villages with divergent agendas and social and economic identities, and have failed to manage these
areas.24 Gradually, illicit felling in orans has become common. Traditional systems of social fencing
have also broken down as the faith systems of younger generations changed. This has resulted in
the degradation of most of the orans in the state. The legal status and total area of several orans
have not been clearly defined. Unfortunately, these lands have not even been declared as forest
lands, hence effective legislation cannot be enforced to deter offenders.25
There are, however, several cases where people of the area have shown keen interest in protecting
the village oran. They have protested encroachments by outsiders as well as members of their own
community without the fear of severing relations with these people. They have filed several cases
in court against those who threatened the oran.
 Rajasthan 579

For example, in village Para of Barmer district, villagers under the leadership of Sanwal Singh
and Arjun Ram Darji filed a case with the help of the local patwari (revenue official) against Sagat
Singh and Lakh Singh of same village because they encroached the oran land for agriculture and
other purposes. In village Gehun of Barmer district, villagers, under the leadership of Kamal Singh
Rajput, Gemaram Nai, Deeparam Raika and others, filed a case against the forest department to
protect the land from the forest department. This case was filed in the Jodhpur High Court and
villagers won the case only because of their unity and awareness.

3.1.4. Kesar chhanta

In southern Rajasthan people sprinkle saffron on the boundary of the forest area to indicate
that the area would henceforth be protected and felling of trees would no longer be permitted.
This ritual of sprinkling saffron has helped protect several areas of forests in Southern Aravallis by
placing voluntary restrictions on green felling. In the Udaipur South Forest Division alone, about
12,000 ha of forests are protected by people through kesar chhanta.26
Institutional structures in management
At a village meeting, the patch of forest to be protected is declared. Contributions are sought
to meet the basic costs of completing the process. Saffron (kesar) or rice is collected from an
appointed temple, as a symbol of the local deity (most often Rishabhdev-Keshariyaji), and people
then move around the forest patch beating drums to communicate the message that kesar is being
sprinkled and that the area is now under community protection.
Selection of forest patches depends on local resource requirements based on the following
criteria:
• Vegetative cover
• Degree of degradation
• Potential for regeneration
• Requirements of the dependent community
• Common arrangements on the area covered in kesar chhanta
• Availability of other areas to fulfill resource requirements after reducing access to this area
Villagers are permitted to water their cattle if there is any reservoir in the forest patch. Vaids
(traditional medical practitioners) are permitted to extract local medicines. People in general can
only extract NTFP in times of scarcity. Fodder extraction is permitted but grazing is not.
Constraints and opportunities
The past few centuries saw a dramatic change in the sensitivity of the local villagers towards
conservation of the village commons and particularly the forest lands. At present the rural youth,
who are mainly responsible for taking forward the traditions, have either less interest in community
management practices or have no faith in them. The basic reason is probably because of getting
lesser returns. However, there are still examples of community-managed pasturelands which can
be seen in the southern part of Rajasthan.
The system of kesar chhanta is still alive in this region and can again be reactivated in many
more areas to bring awareness among the younger generation so that they realize the importance
of community management and that is in the better interest of the local community that the age-
old tradition is carried forward. Apart from this the government is also providing the opportunities
to the villagers through formation of local village institutions in programmes like Joint Forest
state chapter - rajasthan

Management, Watershed Development, and IWDP. If these programmes are implemented in a

systematic way, then there are bright chances of communities taking over the management of the
pasturelands.

3.1.5. Radi
Close to village settlements, amidst cultivable areas, are remarkable woodlands, known as radis,
which are found in Bundi, Kota, Baran and Jhalawar districts of Rajasthan. Radis are most frequent
in Kota. Adjoining these radis are farmlands, sharply demarcated from the surrounding country.
Consisting mainly of babul (Acacia nilotica) trees, they are only found within the Vindhya hills of
Hadoti. They were earlier mostly timber-supply forests being maintained by patels and jagirdars on
behalf of the village, somewhat as private property.27 Radi now considered is a common property
580 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

of one or two villages.

A.P.F Hamilton,28 the then Inspector General of Forests, wrote in an inspection note in 1946 after
visiting the forests of Kota State:
‘There already exists a type of minor forest called radi: they are small forests, generally babul,
managed by the State entirely for the use of the villagers, to whom the trees are sold at low rates.
This is the sort of thing that is required all over India in rural districts where forests are scarce
or absent. I would suggest that this excellent custom be extended in the State; and particularly
in those areas, which have become denuded of forest. Babul is the best tree but it will not grow
everywhere and Prosopis juliflora should be sown wherever conditions are unfavorable for it. These
little forests should not be expensive to establish and protection might be given through a system
of collective responsibility on the part ofthe villagers or through local panchayat. I think they will
pay for themselves in the end.’
The Government of Rajasthan, by various notifications between 1960 and 1970, legally transferred
small radis to panchayats and entered them as charagah (pasture) lands, and large radis were
declared as reserved forests.
Pandey records the largest radi—Khandgaon Ki Radi, near the Pisahedi, Rajpura, Alyahedi, Deoli
and Khandgaon villages—at 194 ha (1.94 sq km).
Use of radi
Resource use in the radis can be described in several ways:29
• Roads and village paths may pass through it. Bharbardaris (head-loaders) were given right of
passage and fuelwood collection.
• Water points: Some radis also have talai, ponds or small depressions where livestock could
drink water. These ponds are in close proximity, to places of worship, though the place of
worship may not always be situated inside the radi. For example, Khandgaon Ki Radi has Sunari
Talai and Bheruji Ki Talai.
• Places of worship: Some radis have devasthans (sacred places) where villagers offer prayers
and worship during festivals. Khandgaon Ki Radi has several sacred places, such as Ajraji, Sida
Mataji and Bheruji.
• Funeral places: Radis may also be the sites for funerals, as is the case with Khandgaon ki
Radi.
• Grazing: Grazing of village cattle is permitted free of cost.
• Fuelwood: Collection of dead and fallen wood is permitted free of cost.
Constraints and opportunities
The main constraints in the conservation and development of radi are encroachment by the people,
illegal mining, illegal tree felling, etc. Efforts are being made by the government to promote this
traditional conservation practice, but unfortunately only in very few cases. The major setback to
this traditional method was declaration of radis as reserved forests rather than involving villagers
in protection and management of radi. In several cases where the area under plantation is more,
these patches of plantations are being termed as forest lands, but in cases where the area is small
it is not falling under the forest land category. Apparently both – the government and the local
villagers -- neglect the maintenance and protection of these small patches. No proper efforts have
been made to promote radi to widely establish it in the Hadoti region. There are several examples
available within the state when government declared the radi as reserved forest and within few
years it got degraded.
Now the question is: how to promote this age-old tradition to meet the fuel–fodder requirement
of the villagers? Attempts should be made to involve the villagers where such radis are still present
and can be used to meet out the fuel–fodder requirements through the Joint
Forest Management Programme.

3.2. Self-initiated community efforts at natural

resource management
3.2.1. Efforts at Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary30
Apart from the traditional systems of conservation and natural resource
management mentioned above, there are numerous examples where
 Rajasthan 581

the communities have taken up conservation efforts in recent times. These efforts are often a
consequence of serious resource scarcity. Such community efforts are typically exemplified by the
efforts of Baragaon ki Panchayat (council of twelve villages) in Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary, within
the buffer zone of Ranthamboree National Park in Sawai Madhopur district. The vegetation of the
area is dry deciduous, dominated by dhok. Though not much wildlife can be seen here today, this
area was once as famous for wild animals as is the neighboring Ranthamboree. It is also a part of
the tiger reserve, forming part of its buffer zone. In the decades preceding 1980s, these forests
were under several external pressures, such as hunting activities of the imperial rulers (before
Independence) and more recently of the bargi community; government forestry operations;
illegal felling; mining; and extensive grazing by the migratory rabari community. The sanctuary is
inhabited by predominantly pastoral gujjar and meena communities. Hit by the resource scarcity
resulting from these activities, the villages in the area decided to organise themselves and oppose
the excessive use of resources by outsiders like the Rabaris, as well as to regulate their own use
of the resources.
Institutional arrangements in management
In 1990, 12 villages (traditionally having an apex body for conflict resolution) decided to form the
Baragaon ki Panchayat, primarily to take stock of the rabari problem. This body gradually started
taking the responsibility for protecting the forest. The elders of the individual villages formed the
kulhadi band panchayat (no-axe council). This council in each village ensured that no one went to
the forest with an axe to fell green trees. Only dry and dead wood was allowed to be collected for
fuel. The kulhadi band panchayat resolves all forest-related offences, and when they cannot be
resolved at this level the matter is taken up to Baragaon ki Panchayat. As a result of this initiative,
forest use is highly regulated and Rabaris are not allowed to enter in certain areas.
In more recent years, the community initiatives have run into trouble. This is partly due to the GEF-
funded ecodevelopment project carried out by the forest department, under which Ecodevelopment
Committees were set up in many villages. These new institutions did not necessarily build on the
villagers’ own institutions such as the Baragaon ki Panchayat, but rather tended to undermine
them. (See Case Studies)

3.3. Community efforts supported or initiated with the help of NGOs

Several NGOs have contributed significantly to conservation of natural resources in the state.
Some of these NGOs and their efforts are mentioned below.
3.3.1. The Tarun Bharat Sangh (TBS)
The TBS was founded some 16 years ago, with the objective of accelerating rural development
through restoration of ecology. TBS is based in Bhikampura Kishori in Alwar district, and is known
for its efforts in reviving the traditional rainwater harvesting structures. TBS claims to have
constructed more than 4500 check dams in various villages in Rajasthan. The NGO propagates by
word of mouth the art of making earthen dams. About 1200 villages in this drought prone area are
believed to have benefited from the efforts of the NGO. The process of construction of the water
harvesting structures (locally called johads) is usually accompanied by regeneration and protection
of the forest making up the catchment of the johads, and micro-credit programmes for the local
women.
The Arvari river is a small but important river in Alwar district feeding Sainthan Sagar lake. For
the villages settled along the river, the Arvari is a lifeline. This area is a part of the Aravalli range
that extends from Rajasthan to Delhi. The region is dry, receiving less than 600 mm of rainfall
annually. Over the last few decades severe droughts have characterised many of the villages in
this district.
state chapter - rajasthan

There are 70 villages in the Arvari catchment. Local livelihoods are a combination of intensive
rainfed cultivation and animal husbandry. This area had a tradition of trapping water during the
short rainy season in a series of small johads. Systems were in place to ensure that these johads
were regularly maintained and their catchments were protected to avoid siltation. In the post-
independence era, over-dependence on the state for irrigation caused neglect of johads, while
excessive tree felling for various reasons by the state and local people caused complete degradation
of their catchments. As a result many rivers like the Arvari ran dry, forcing people to move out in
search of employment and reducing the soil productivity to the minimum. From the time that TBS
started (towards the end of 1980s), about 200 water-harvesting structures have been built in the
catchment of the Arvari by local villagers with help from TBS. These structures have replenished
ground water and increased the water table, enabling the Arvari to flow perennially again.
582 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The twin villages of Bhaonta-Kolyala have a combined population of about 600, covering an area
of 1200 ha. They have played a prominent role in this initiative of combining water harvesting, forest
conservation and other rural development work. In order to carry out these activities the village has
formed a gram sabha (village assembly), although this institution has no legal or state recognition.
The village has constructed about 17 johads over a period of a decade. These structures have been
built with technical help and 75 per cent of the cost covered by TBS. The village contributed 25 per
cent of the cost as labour or in kind. The village is protecting the catchment forests of these johads
by regulating grazing, fuel wood collection and reducing the number of livestock in the village. On
the other hand, presence of perennial water has increased agricultural productivity and improved
the groundwater situation, thus reducing the need for out-migration. (see case study for details).
After a decade of successful protection, based on a suggestion from TBS, the villagers decided to
call their forest Bhairon Dev Lok Van Abhyaranya (Bhairon Dev People’s Sanctuary) in October
1998.31
Arvari sansad
In 1998, at the initiative of TBS the villagers of 34 villages (of the total 72 situated in the Arvari
basin) met and decided to constitute an Arvari sansad or Arvari parliament. The sansad includes
two members from each village, selected by the local village institutions. The sansad meets every
six months to take decisions about the land, water and forests.
A 15-member co-ordinating committee was formed, headed by Kanhaiya Lal Gujjar from Bhaonta
and Chaju Ram of Samara village. This co-ordinating committee is in the process of preparing a set
of guidelines for resource utilisation in the catchment based on suggestions arising out of discussions
with the local villagers. The committee is also in the process of identifying government officials
interested in decentralised management, in order to start consultations with them. An action plan
has also been made, under the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan process.32
Opportunities and constraints
Though this initiative has resulted in improved status of natural resources and a consequent
improvement in the social status of the local villagers, there are still many issues which need
serious consideration. The boundaries used by the conserving villages such as Bhaonta are
traditional boundaries, not necessarily recognised by neighbouring villagers who do not agree with
the conservation approach of these villages. Since these villages do no have any legal authority to
stop outsiders, this gives rise to conflicts among these villages. Of late (in the early years of the
new millennium), the surrounding villages too have begun to appreciate the need to conserve the
forests.
There are also often problems of intra-village inequities, with complaints from the lower castes and
classes of discrimination or not being included in the decision-making process. Non-participation of
women in decision-making and implementation is one serious concern in Rajasthan.

3.3.2. Seva Mandir33

Seva Mandir was established in 1966 by Mohan Singh Mehta. Seva Mandir works in the economically
and socially deprived tribal belt of Udaipur district, where there is a heavy dependence of people
upon natural resources. Over the years they have spread their work to about 535 villages in
Udaipur District. Their main activities are in the field of natural resource development, education,
health, women and child development, and institution building. Seva Mandir has been involved
in a number of villages, and regeneration and conservation of natural resources has been taken
up by the villagers. In addition, it has been involved with a number of biodiversity studies in the
Aravalli region, including documenting people’s knowledge and perception of biodiversity. They
have also helped develop a strategy for conserving biodiversity in the Mahad cluster in Phulwari Ki
Nal wildlife sanctuary in Kotra block of Udaipur District.
In village Badlipada, the Udaipur based NGO Seva Mandir started its activities through adult
education programme in the 80s. The organization contributed to the process of institution
building, to a large extent through its continuous involvement. A major turn in village events came
in 1995 when a village education committee was set up. As the committee became an accepted
institution, all aspects and issues related to health, education, agriculture, pastures, forests and
other social issues started getting discussed in the committee meeting. After the drought of 1987
villagers decided to close their charnot (pastureland). But Raju and Behra of Badlipada village
and Lakhama of Richawar village encroached the pastureland. Villagers started protesting against
the encroachment. A committee meeting was called to discuss the matter, where these three
encroachers were also called to sort out the matter but they did not turn up. In 1996 the committee
 Rajasthan 583

members went to the sub-divisional officer of Jhadol to appeal for action against the encroachers
and they succeeded in declaring entire 75 bighas of land as village pastureland. Apart from this, in
order to put additional pressure on the encroachers, the villagers also decided to socially boycott
them. But the efforts were in vain and the encroachers continued to take crops on the pastureland.
In February 2001 villagers decided to destroy the crop. And one fine day they also broke the house
of the encroacher and freed their pastureland from the encroachers. After this villagers enclosed
the charnot in its entirety and started plantation and other pasture development activities with the
help of Seva Mandir in April 2001. Now the villagers have come out with a very good management
system of this pastureland. They have appointed two watchmen who are paid Rs 300 per month.
In October 2002 the villagers did the kesar chhidakav (sprinkling of saffron) in the charnot. After
the enclosure of the charnot, villagers have harvested the grass twice. One member from each
household is allowed to harvest the grass. They also fixed a price per sickle. In the first year they
were able to harvest 8,000 bundles of grass (each 1.5 kg in weight). In order to realize these
benefits, it took sustained efforts of seven years from the people of Badlipada to free their charnot
of encroachment.34

3.4. Community action initiated by the government

3.4.1. Joint Forest Management
The Joint Forest Management movement is now more than a decade old in the state and seems
to have made considerable progress. There is a lot of development since 1991, when the JFM
directive was issued in Rajasthan. Initially, there were separate resolutions for working in non-
forest lands, such as revenue wasteland and forest land. The directives issued on 15th May 1999
put both types of land under the same category. There are a total of 3667 village forest protection
and management committees (VFPMC) in the state that cover an area of 376765.88 hectares of
forest land. Total forest area of Rajasthan is 3.19 million ha. Dense forest is 0.36 million ha., open
forest 0.95 million ha. and barren forest 2.88 million ha35, out of which around 11.81 per cent area
is covered under JFM, according to the forest department.
But the major question is whether these VFPMCs are functioning as per the JFM guidelines. The
answer is in the negative. Because it is still in its initial phase, the villagers are not convinced
whether they will get benefits from the forest or whether they will be sidelined at the time of
benefit-sharing. In most of the cases villagers are getting grass, tendu leaves, fuelwood and
other NTFPs in the southern and dang areas of Rajasthan. None of the villages is in the position
to share the timber from the forest as a final sharing. It is because most of the forest lands are
yet to mature and in the old forests villagers are not in the position to ask the FD for their share,
because the GR says that the VFPMC would only share in the final felling if they have contributed a
major share in the development of the forest. The FD claims that old forests are their property and
that villagers have not contributed in the development of these forests. Therefore the question is
still valid and the FD is not in a position to answer the question. They have also got a big project
sanctioned from the Japanese government to develop the degraded forest area of the Aravalli hill
range. It is still not clear whether the communities would be involved in execution of this project.
Institutional structures in management
For effective implementation of JFM, a VFPMC is to be formed in the respective villages. Every
family living in the village would be a member of the general body of the VFPMC. There will be a
women’s sub-committee to promote active women’s participation in the VFPMCs’ activities. The
VFPMC will be formed in the presence of 40 per cent members of general body. 11 members would
be elected to the executive body. This body then selects a president, vice president and treasurer.
A secretary would be appointed from the FD for two years. After successful completion of two years
villagers can appoint their own secretary. The term of this executive body would be two years,
state chapter - rajasthan

after which a new body would be elected. Terms of reference between the FD and VFPMC would
be signed.
As per the JFM guidelines, the roles and responsibilities of various office bearers are as follows:
• The president provides overall leadership and direction.
• The vice-president assists the president and plays an
advisory role.
• The secretary, who is the local forester in most of the
cases, keeps all records (including money transactions
and minutes of meetings) and maintains the link between
the committee and FD.
584 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

• The treasurer would be responsible for all financial transactions.

In JFM, the institutional structure is well defined, but in practice the control is with the forest
department and villagers do not have any say in decisions. Most of the decisions are taken by the
forest department and the VFPMC has to follow. This is mainly because of low awareness level at
the community and/or VFPMC level.
Opportunities and constraints
There are various issues related to JFM in Rajasthan. There are constraints in promoting and
establishing JFM in Rajasthan but there are opportunities as well. Some of the constraints are:
• Less effort has been taken to allow greater space and opportunities to the local community for
proper management of forests.
• The local forester is so overloaded with work that there is very little scope for him to acquire
greater understanding of JFM-related opportunities and management processes.
• In most of the villages the forest plays a major role in the livelihood of people, but there have
been no serious efforts within the state to look at JFM beyond plantation protection, except for a
few examples like Varai Devi VFPMC in Chittorgarh district of Rajasthan.
• Raising awareness and broad understanding about JFM-related issues is essential to fully release
the benefits of people-friendly approaches to forest management. Voluntary organisations can
play a crucial role in this regard.
• Capacity building of VFPMC members and FD staff is the immediate intervention required for
successful JFM implementation.
In Rajasthan there are good opportunities to promote JFM. In most of the villages, residents
understand the importance of forests in their livelihood, and they are coming forward to protect
and develop their forest. For this to succeed, awareness-building among the villagers about JFM
is a must.

Box l
Joint Forest Protection and Management in Nayakhera village36
Nayakhera is a small village located at a distance of about l5 km from Udaipur city. The local
forest ranger took the initiative and persuaded the villagers to constitute a VFPMC. The village
elders also favoured the idea of protecting their own forests to meet their basic needs of fodder
and fuelwood. The VFPMC was registered in June 1995 and has since raised plantations over
315 ha of degraded forest land. The villagers take pride in showing this dense patch of forest
to the visitors now. In addition to this the VFPMC is also protecting 120 ha of natural forests
adjoining the village. The grass thus produced has a ready market in the surrounding areas and
earns substantial revenue for the villagers. An anicut has been constructed with help from the
forest department, which has not only recharged the ground water but is also now an important
source of water for irrigation. Nayakhera village has won the state prize for forest protection.

4. Emerging issues and the way ahead

Most community resource-use areas are currently under varying degrees of threat. There are
no favourable government policies for protection and promotion of such practices, nor does the
government have any systematic records of such initiatives. No special legal status is accorded to
these areas and no action is taken on complaints of encroachment. Market forces have severely
affected the very basis on which the ethos of community conservation is based, and panchayats
are unable to protect the common property resources (CPRs) because of personal agendas and
limited understandings of the impact of commons on livelihoods. Internal politics and conflicts, lack
of awareness, little or no financial support, and encroachments by migrants are other reasons that
have led to the degradation of these resource-use areas. Though these areas once played a vital
role in meeting fodder requirements in times of scarcity, the degradation of resources over time
has eroded traditional conservation management systems.
The central government has launched a programme called Maru Gochar Yojana with an objective
of developing orans, pasturelands and gochar land in villages. This programme is for a short period
of three years and would be implemented in ten desert districts of Rajasthan. Forest department has
been given the responsibility to prepare the project proposal. This project would be implemented
 Rajasthan 585

through the gram panchayats. The forest department would play the role of a technical support
agency to the panchayats. The total cost of this project is Rs 10 crores. This is not sufficient to
conserve and develop such a large area of degraded pastures.

4.1. Future strategy for conservation and development of CCAs

Some of the strategies that could lead to the development of the CCAs are as follows:
• Regeneration and/or plantation programmes, as appropriate, should be undertaken on a large
scale in CCAs.
• Seminars at school as well as college level to highlight the importance of CCA in maintaining
livelihoods should be organized on a regular basis.
• The government should conduct detailed surveys to prepare a directory of CCAs.
• A policy to promote CCAs must be formulated.
• Documentation of traditional practices should be done and shared.
• Programmes like the Aravalli Sacred Groves Conservation Programme should be replicated on a
much larger scale.
• Some portion of panchayat funds should be spent on conserving CCAs.
• Conservation of sacred groves should be a priority in developmental programmes like watershed
development programmes.

Sandeep Khanwalkar is associated with ARAVALLI, Rajasthan; email:khanwalkar_s@rediffmail.com

Endnotes
1
Rajasthan Institute for Public Administration, Rajasthan State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, 2002. Prepared
for National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan - India. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Contained in CD with
Securing India’s Future: Technical Report of the NBSAP – India (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).
2
Rajasthan Institute for Public Administration, Rajasthan State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. (As above)
3
http://www.censusindia.net/t_00_003.html
4
http://www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Religiondata_2001.xls
5
Total livestock population is 54,348,901. Source: Livestock Census, 1997, Board of Revenue for Rajasthan.
6
Total wool production (2000-01): 196 lakh kg.
7
Rajasthan Institute for Public Administration, Rajasthan State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. (As above)
8
Brandis D. Indian Forestry. Oriental University Institute. 1897.
9
S. Shresth and S. Devidas Forest Revival and Water Harvesting. Community Based Conservation at Bhaonta-Kolyala,
Rajasthan. (London and Pune International Institute of Environment and Development and Kalpavriksh, 2001).
10
Jagirdari shall mean any person (holding jagir or any interest therein in any part of the state) and recognized as a
jagirdar under any existing jagir law and shall include a grantee of jagir land from a jagirdar.
11
Shresth and Devidas, Forest Revival. (As above).
12
As per the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953
13
Shresth and Devidas, Forest Revival. (As above).
state chapter - rajasthan

14
Madhav Gadgil and Ramachandra Guha, Equity and Ecology: The Use and Abuse of nature in Contemporary India
(New Delhi, Penguin Books, 1995).
15
Johad is a community pond and paithan is its catchment area.
16
CECOEDECON. Undated. Orans: Marubhumi Me Hariyali Ki Chadar (Shil ke Dungri, Chaksu, CECOEDECON).
17
(As above).
18
For any talab, the bund is the main part and water pressure is comparatively greater on the bund than any other
part. As most of this region is plain, the length of a bund has to be longer to distribute the water pressure evenly. It
therefore makes a lot of sense to plant trees along the bunds.
19
D.N. Pandey, Sajha Van Prabandhan (Udaipur, Himanshu Publications, 1998).
20
Every villager contributes towards meeting the costs of this function. Villagers from the neighbouring villages were
586 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

also invited to attend this function. After completion of pooja (prayer), villagers sing traditional songs and bhajans
(hymns) in praise of God. On this day villagers have their food there. Every villager has to contribute some amount
as per her/his capacity to celebrate this function. It has become a tradition to celebrate this day every year.
21
An island constructed during talab construction.
22
Pandey, Sajha Van Prabandhan. (As above).
23
See www.wwfindia.org.
24
D.N. Pandey, 1999. ‘Sacred Forestry: The Case of Rajasthan, India’, Sustainable Development International, 1-6
(1999), available at: http://www.p2pays.org/ref/40/39748.pdf.
25
Pandey, Sajha Van Prabandhan. (As above).
26
Pandey, ‘Sacred Forestry’. (As above).
27
(As above).
28
Quoted in Pandey, ‘Sacred Forestry’. (As above).
29
(As above).
30
Priya Das, ‘Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary: Prospects of Joint Management’ in Ashish Kothari,Farhad Vania, Priya Das,
K. Christopher and Suniti Jha (eds), Building Bridges: Towards Joint Management of Protected Areas in India (New
Delhi, Indian Institute of Public Administration, 1997).
31
Ashish Kothari, Neema Pathak and Farhad Vania, Where Communities Care: Community Based Wildlife and Ecosystem
Management in South Asia (Pune, International Institute of Environment and Development and Kalpavriksh, 2000).
32
Tarun Bharat Sangh. 2003. Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Arvari Catchment. A Sub -State Site in Rajasthan.
Prepared for National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan – India. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Contained
in CD with Securing India’s Future: Technical Report of the NBSAP – India (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).
33
Seva Mandir, Documentation of people’s knowledge and perception about biodiversity and conservation across
related ecosystems and agro-ecology zones in Rajasthan, Udaipur (Udaipur, Seva Mandir, 1997).
34
Seva Mandir. Land community & Governance: An exploration of Seva Mandir’s work with Rural Communities and
Governance Mechanisms on Land in Udaipur, Rajasthan (Udaipur, Sewa Mandir).
35
Government of India, Forest Survey of India 2003, available at: http://www.fsiorg.net/fsi2003/states/index.
asp?state_code=23&state_name=Rajasthan)
36
Rajasthan Institute for Public Administration 2005. (As above).
 CCA/Raj/CS1/Alwar/Bhaonta-Kolyala/Water harvesting and forest protection

Bhaonta-Kolyala villages, Alwar

Background
This study is an attempt to understand the natural resource conservation and management
efforts of twin villages Bhaonta-Kolyala in approximately 600 ha of forest area in the upper
catchment of a recently revived rivulet, the Arvari.1 The Arvari catchment is located in Alwar
district of Rajasthan in western India. The resident communities and the Tarun Bharat Sangh
(TBS) support the conservation initiative.2 This effort is not only indicative of the potential of local
institutions in protecting natural resources but also provides an example of the role NGOs can play
in strengthening communities and conservation initiatives.
Bhaonta-Kolyala are villages situated in the upper catchment of the river Arvari, in Alwar district
of Rajasthan, western India. The area is a part of the Aravalli range that extends from Rajasthan
to Delhi. The region is dry, receiving less than 600 mm rainfall annually. Over the last few decades,
severe drought conditions have characterised many of the villages in this district.
The villagers and a local NGO, Tarun Bharat Sangh (TBS), have built around 200 water-harvesting
structures in 70 villages in the Arvari catchment over the last 15 years. These structures have
replenished groundwater and increased the water table, enabling the Arvari to flow perennially
again. Bhaonta-Kolyala have played a prominent role in this initiative, particularly in combining
water harvesting with forest conservation and other rural reconstruction work.
The main livelihood strategy in this semi-arid region is a combination of intensive rain-fed
cultivation and animal husbandry. Water conservation in this area has traditionally involved trapping
water during the monsoon months by constructing a series of small dams and tanks (johads).
Johads require regular maintenance. It is also important that the slopes of the hills remain forested
to avoid soil erosion from the hills silting up the ponds. In the years following Independence, over-
dependence on the Indian state for irrigation caused the villagers to ignore the maintenance of
the johads. At the same time, excessive tree felling in the hilly areas not only stripped the area of
forest cover but also increased soil erosion and silting up of the johads.
In the pre-conservation days, nearly all families had to send at least one member to cities for
work. With the increased pastoral and agricultural productivity in the past few years, there has
reportedly been a reduction in the number of men going outside for work. However, members of
large families do need to augment their incomes, and at times when additional income is required
(e.g., for a wedding), individuals still go to cities in search of work. All Balai families need to send
their men outside the village for work. Men from the village generally work as manual labourers in
flour mills in Delhi and Jaipur.
In 1990, the villages of
Bhaonta-Kolyala, spread over
about 1200 hectares, had a
combined population of a little
under 600,. There are three
communities in the villages
and the surrounding region:
case studies - rajasthan

gujjars, balais and rajputs.

The gujjars are numerically
dominant. According to the
norms of traditional social
hierarchy, rajputs occupy
the highest position in
society; the gujjars come
second; and the balais are
on the lowest rung. While the
rajputs and gujjar share ties
Community protected forests of Bhaonta Kolyala, Alwar district of commensality, they do not
Photo: Farhad Vania
587
588 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

eat and drink with the balai. In the past, this hierarchy was reflected in the economic situation
of each community. The rajputs, as jagirdars3 of Bhaonta, controlled most of the resources. The
gujjars and balais were dependent on the Rajputs for employment, waiving of loans and revenue.
The influence of the rajputs extended over Kolyala as well.
The villages are set in the flatlands at the foot of the Aravalli hills, which are (or were at one
point) covered by dry deciduous or scrub forests. These forests are mostly on land belonging to the
forest department (FD). The Alwar Division Working Plan for 1979-1989 mentions these forests as
unclassed forests. Habitat classification systems in India have undergone changes over the years.
Unfortunately many of these classifications seem inadequate due to lack of mapping and can only
be considered valid for a few selected regions and stands. Bhaonta-Kolyala belongs to the dhok
forest zone (semi-arid areas of East Rajasthan) and is equivalent to the edaphic climax type of
dry tropical forests of Champion and Seth (1968).4 This region has more or less been stripped of
its natural vegetation over the last few decades. These forests occur on a variety of rock and soil
formations and thus vary in composition depending on the factors that control them. The most
common species found is dhok, a slow-growing species with a height of up to 12 metres at places.
Due to continuous hacking and grazing, this species has been reduced to scrambling bushes. On
the higher slopes and plateaus, salar is found. The other common species are gurjan, safed dhok
(not in Bhaonta region), khair, tendu, jingha, kakoon and others.
Faunal diversity must at one point have been high, as indicated by early travelogues and
descriptions of ‘game’.5 Tiger, panther, blackbuck, chinkara and other mammal species, apart
from a large diversity of birds and other faunal life, were apparently found commonly. With habitat
destruction and widespread hunting, wildlife appears to have declined considerably, though in the
Sariska Tiger Reserve and in the community-regenerated and protected forests there is reportedly a
revival of the population of several species. Presently
the mammal species found in these forests
include porcupine, hyena, hare, leopard, wild
boar, jackal, nilgai, mongoose and Hanuman
langur, apart from a number of other birds and
reptiles.
Villagers are heavily dependent on the forests for
fuel, fodder, non-timber forest produce, etc. Goats
graze in the forest everyday, since the villagers
(except the rajputs) do not like to stall-feed goats. For
many years, the Bhaonta forest has been supporting
the goat population of the surrounding villages. During
the monsoons, due to the abundance of good quality
fodder, some shepherds take their buffaloes and cows
up to the maidan (open and flat ground) in the malali
region. This is the only maidan that is big enough to
serve as a cattle camp.

Towards community conservation

According to the village elders, from the 1940s onwards the forests in the region were heavily
worked by the FD and dhok was extensively extracted for charcoal. The villagers recall a drought in
1944 that took a heavy toll on human and natural resources. Since water was scarce, livestock had
become the major source of livelihood. Villagers say that they had overgrazed the forest during
this time and forests had severely depleted. Cattle grazed through a system of contractual grazing
in neighbouring areas. According to the villagers, prior to the construction of water-harvesting
structures, only maize, chana and sarson (mustard) (crops that do not need too much water) could
be grown once a year in some of the fields. Fodder crops were grown during the rest of the year
or by those who had no access to water. Villagers remember that construction and maintenance
of johads was traditionally the responsibility of the village. Some water-works were also built
by the state. However their maintenance was also the responsibility of the village community.
Water scarcity seems to be at least about 50-55 years old. Most people in the age group of 50-60
remember water shortages in the area. In their opinion, reliance on the Indian state, in both the
pre- and post-Independence era, eroded the sense of communal responsibility towards natural
resources. The old water harvesting structures fell into disuse due to poor maintenance.
 Rajasthan 589

Box 1
Johad6
A johad is a simple mud and rubble structure built across a water channel that holds rainwater.
Sometimes a series of these may be built along the catchment of the water channel. These
structures have high embankments on three sides and the fourth is left open for the entry of
rainwater. The shape of a johad is in most cases concave and resembles a crescent. The height
of the embankment is such that the capacity of the johad is more than the volume of run-off
coming from the catchment. This is based on a rough estimation of a maximum possible run-
off that could come into it. Johads require regular maintenance. Annual pitching of the soil in
the cracks before the monsoon and desilting are essential for their efficiency and survival. The
advantage of this system is that, along with arresting rainwater, it improves the moisture level
at sub-soil level in the fields, particularly in downstream areas. This recharged groundwater is
the major source of irrigation in the region, including through wells.

Bhoanta-Kolyala’s move towards community-based conservation and management of natural

resources has its roots in the initiative of the NGO Tarun Bharat Sangh and the villagers of
Gopalpura, a nearby hamlet. In 1985, this village had organised around TBS to build a johad,
which showed quick results. As the news of the success in Gopalpura spread in the region, one of
the village elders in Bhaonta, Sundra Baba, contacted TBS for similar work to be undertaken in the
village. In early 1986, a padayatra (foot march) was organised by the TBS in the region. It was an
awareness campaign with a slogan johad banao, jungle bachao (build johads, save forest). During
the padayatra, the villagers of Bhaonta-Kolyala expressed a desire to initiate water and forest
conservation. A series of discussions among the villagers and with TBS resulted in a decision by
the people of both the villages to collectively protect the forest and construct johads with the help
of TBS. By 1987, forest protection measures were already in place. In 1988 construction of johads
began in the village. The construction of the first one was completed in four years.
To facilitate collective decision-making on forest protection and water harvesting, a gram sabha
was formed. While the idea of a gram sabha came from TBS, the actual formation and organisation
of the body was a village activity. This body acts as the regulatory and coordinating unit for
building waterworks. All decisions are taken collectively.

Forest protection
In Bhaonta-Kolyala, forest protection apparently pre-dates the construction of water harvesting
structures. The decision to protect the forest involved admitting past mistakes and a commitment
to regulated forest use. The villagers used the old forest boundary from the jagirdari (when the
area was under a local landlord, the Jagirdar) days to demarcate the area they could protect.
The gram sabha evolved a pattern of regulations and penalties. These rules were formed keeping
in mind the needs of the village community and sustainable use of the forest. Overgrazing and
tree felling were perceived to be the prime reasons for degeneration of forests, but grazing is an
important activity and a total prohibition was impossible. A mutual decision was taken to allow the
grazing of village goats in the forest. Shepherds were asked not to cut any trees while their goats
were grazing. The village community also tried to reduce the number of goats in the village. Only
wood that was dry or on the forest floor was allowed to be collected for fuel.

Water works
A total of 17 johads were built in the village. These include structures built on private lands. For
case studies - rajasthan

the two dams on common lands, TBS provided technical help and 75 per cent of the total cost; the
other 25 per cent of the cost of building was the villagers’ responsibility. The village community
chose the site of the dams and TBS members calculated the cost of construction. In a series of
gram sabha meetings, the amount to be paid by each household as cash or labour (shramdaan)
was calculated. Over the years, meeting this 25 per cent of the cost in the form of either labour or
cash from each family was coordinated by the gram sabha.

Institutional arrangement
No government body apart from the FD and the revenue department (RD) has a presence in the
village. Though the village is part of a panchayat7 and one person from the village is its up-sarpanch
590 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

(deputy head), little work has been done by this body. Most villagers appear disinterested in the
panchayat and feel that since they have done all the water harvesting, forest conservation and
other work themselves, they do not need the panchayat. Apart from a school that was built with
panchayat money, there is no link with this body, judicial or financial.
The villagers had formed a gram sabha (village council) nearly ten years ago to organise water
and forest conservation. This is the only organised body in the village. It settles all matters
concerning forest and water resources. There is little indication of any major contentious issues
or cases of conflict in the village. The gram sabha is a self-initiated body and does not have any
formal authority.
According to the villagers, while there had been a strong sense of collective solidarity in the
village, there had earlier been little collective organisation or action. The community had earlier
not felt the need for a body such as a gram sabha or panchayat, formal or informal. However, with
the agenda of forest protection and water harvesting, it was felt that such a body would be useful.
TBS was the inspiration behind the formation of the gram sabha.
The gram sabha was formed as a platform for addressing common concerns through collective
action. It has an open membership, with a quorum of 22 adults, who by and large represent each
hamlet in the two villages. Women are usually few in number. It meets once every month on the
day of amavasya (new moon) and the minutes of every meeting are recorded. Apart from the
adhyaksha (president), it has no other office-bearers. The office of the adhyaksha is informal and
has no power. The adhyaksha is responsible for conducting the monthly gram sabha meetings.

Box 2
Gram Sabha Forest Regulations
1. No shepherd will go into the forest with an axe.
2. If a shepherd is caught cutting a tree, he will be fined Rs 11. Any person who, having
witnessed such an activity, fails to report it to the gram sabha shall be fined Rs 21.
3. No man or woman shall use an axe for collection of fuel. They will only collect dry wood.
4. If wood is required for building a house or for a wedding, the person will collect it only with
the permission of the gram sabha.
5. The gram sabha will meet every month on amavasya (new moon day).
6. In the meetings, any issue relevant to the village community will be discussed.

The gram sabha has the right to make changes in regulations and enforce penalties. The body is,
however, not recognised by the state and has no formal legal authority.

Early challenges: Indiscipline by villagers

There were incidents of tree felling in the early years after introduction of forest regulations,
and offenders refused to pay fines imposed by the gram sabha. However social pressure and
persuasion by the gram sabha has now ensured compliance with the regulations. Villagers feel
that strictness in this early phase helped discipline everyone. They seem to have internalised the
concept of judicious use of natural resources and there are very few instances of violations now.
Villagers recount one particular instance as a milestone. In 1992, the rajputs had allowed some
graziers from the Marwar region to camp in the forest. Though the graziers were gujjars, they
had regional affiliations with the rajputs. The other villagers had expressed their unhappiness over
the large number of goats and sheep but did not take any action, hoping that the rajputs would
themselves ask the graziers to leave. After 15 days, however, when the graziers showed no signs
of leaving, they blocked their entry into the forest (the graziers had come down to the village for
their daily necessities). The graziers were forced to leave. Since then, no one from the village has
undertaken contractual grazing of livestock or hosted graziers from other regions.
Other neighbouring villages committed ‘offences’ as well. In the early years of protection, when
offences were detected, the gram sabha memebers went to the offending village and checked
the houses of those they thought were offenders. Since women were often the offenders, women
from Bhaonta-Kolyala were asked to accompany the ‘search parties’ (usually the older women
went). Villagers were also persuaded to respect the traditional jagirdari boundary and obey forest
regulations if they entered Bhaonta forest. Such incidents are now less common.
 Rajasthan 591

Gram kosh
The gram sabha felt that having a fund (kosh) for the village would strengthen the community.
It was decided that each household would contribute five kg of grains after the harvest. Some of
the collection would be retained as a grain reserve for village needs and the rest could be sold to
build up a monetary fund for common community needs. The fund was established in 1993-94.
However, following the inability of some farmers to pay back the loan amount and interest, in the
following years it could not be built up and remained as a small grain reserve. The aim of the grain
bank is to provide relief to those families whose grain reserves might need to be replenished before
harvest. During the period before harvest, the grain prices in the market are high and the family
head can take the required amount from the gram kosh reserves. After the harvest, the amount
can be paid back with a pre-fixed interest. Repayment can be in cash or kind. In the past couple
of years, this reserve has helped several families, though in its limited capacity. An auxiliary of
the gram sabha, the gram kosh is headed by an adhyaksha, whose duties include maintenance
of stock, keeping records of loans and payment, keeping the gram sabha apprised of the status
of the reserve and ensuring recovery of loans. The decision about loans is taken in the gram
sabha meetings. If a loan has been given prior to the monthly meeting, the gram sabha has to be
informed of the transaction.
The adhyaksha is keen to build the monetary component of the kosh. For this the villagers plan
to utilise the amount they have collected from forest fines and repayment of loans.

Declaration of Bhairon Dev Lok Van Abhayaranya

Situated at a distance of 15 km from the village, Sariska Tiger Reserve holds considerable
interest in the peoples’ minds. They have had a long association with the area due to the presence
of a Bharthari Baba shrine in the park. The area was declared a state game sanctuary in 1959 and
was later declared a National Park and Tiger Reserve. Sariska is the only region in Alwar to have
a tiger population till recently.8 The villagers in the surrounding area call it Bharthari or sonchirri
(from sanctuary). In an interesting move parallel to the official protected area of Sariska, and after
10 years of successful community initiative, the forest of Bhaonta-Kolyala was declared a Bhairon
Dev Lok Van Abhayaranya (Bhairon Dev People’s Sanctuary) in October 1998.9 This was on TBS’
suggestion that the forest be held up as an example of a local community’s successful effort at
conservation. During the festival of Makar Sankranti that year, a stone representing Bharthari
Baba was brought from Sariska and laid adjacent to the temple of the local deity Bhairon Dev. Both
Bhairon Dev and Bharthari Baba are considered the protectors of forests. The village community
wants to present this sanctuary as an alternative to the non-participatory approach to conservation
followed by the FD in Sariska Tiger Reserve.
Villagers say that some regulations were made with the declaration, especially concerning
hunting of animals by outsiders, but we have not been able to find any record of these. According
to Kanhaiyalal Gujjar, who, apart from being one of Bhaonta-Kolyala’s residents, also works
with TBS, the declaration of the sanctuary represents an ideological alternative to the kind of
conservation followed by the forest department. However, since the sonchiri status does not have
any ground-level implications that go beyond the rules already laid down for forest protection,
perhaps this could be one of the reasons that people in the village do not relate to it. In the gram
sabha meetings, the forest is referred to as the ‘jungle’, not as sonchirri. Most villagers believe in
forest protection and have an idea of how to use the forest judiciously. They continue to follow the
pattern of use advised by the gram sabha. Sonchirri seems to be a term used by the more active
members of the village, especially in meetings on forest protection involving other villages in the
area.
case studies - rajasthan

Participation in forest protection

It has not been very easy to discuss with people what they think about
forest protection. Most people spoken to, especially women, did not talk
about forest regulations. But the manner in which they use the forest reflects
gram sabha regulations. When asked if they were told of the regulations,
some said elders informed them, but most say that they simply ‘know’ how
to use the forest judiciously. We have not been able to understand how this
knowledge has developed, or how forest protection has this unquestioned
acceptance. It is possible that people have over the years internalised the idea
of forest protection and the use pattern that is associated with it. Like normal
agricultural operations, forest conservation is a routine, almost subconscious
part of village life.
592 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Though the entire community is involved in the initiative, it is useful to delineate the two major
groups that are directly involved in forest-related activities and have to conform to the rules laid
down by the gram sabha: shepherds and women. It is also interesting to note that neither of these
groups is easily visible in the gram sabha.

Shepherds
Each family has some goats. Usually one person from each family is deputed to take the goats for
grazing, and tending to the goats becomes a lifelong commitment for him. Sometimes during the
sowing or harvest season, a younger member of the household may take over this responsibility.
Due to the long-term involvement of the shepherds, usually they are an identifiable group in the
village. However this group is not indicative of any caste. The Rajputs own only a couple of goats
per family and stall-feed them. The Balais too have certain family members tending to the goats.
Since shepherds need to go to the forest everyday, the burden of regulations is largely borne by
them. For them compliance with forest regulations means having to go deeper into the forest to
graze goats. The presence of two leopards in the forest is a threat, and they have to keep a constant
vigil while the sheep are grazing. The older shepherds have witnessed fodder scarcity in the pre-
forest-protection era. The village livestock had to be sent out of the village for grazing through
a contractual system. The younger generation has grown up in a period of awareness and is well
informed of the consequences of not having adequate grazing areas for village livestock. Most of
the shepherds also seem to enjoy the lushness and cooler temperatures in the forest. Therefore,
in spite of some personal hardships, they are supportive of forest protection. The shepherds also
seem to have an informal system of protection or grazing regulations in some areas in the forest.
Sometimes a group of shepherds decides informally that for a specific period (which could range
between two months to a year), they would not take their goats grazing to a particular patch of the
forest. It is not clear, however, whether other shepherds are told about this decision, and whether
there is any coordination amongst all the villagers to leave such a patch alone.
Shepherds are the first to detect offences in the forest area and are the primary informants to
the gram sabha.

Women
Though there is no strict division of labour, fuelwood collection is largely carried out by women.
They are supportive of the conservation process. According to them, it is convenient to have a
forest nearby and not to have to walk long distances for fuel and fodder. Though regulations do
cause some inconvenience (having to search in a larger area for dry fuel), they have no complaints.
According to them protection was the only way to ensure that the forest remains intact. Since going
into the forest is physically arduous and time consuming, they prefer, as far as possible, to meet
the daily requirements from the fields, fallows or trees around the hamlet. The daily pattern of fuel
and fodder collection varies according to time, convenience and necessity. There is a proposal to
develop the village gauchar, and once that is ready, it will be more convenient for them to procure
fodder for cattle and young lambs and kids.
It is hard to detect the presence of women in the decision-making process, especially as they are
not present in significant numbers in gram sabha meetings. According to Rajinder Singh of TBS,
women manage to get their ideas across through husbands and other male members of the family.
According to him, this informal, indirect but effective method works better in the rural setting. He
cites as an example the gram sabha’s decision to allow the collection of a headload of green fodder
for young goats in 1997. Women had wanted this particular concession.
The younger women seldom speak out in the open and have rarely attended gram sabha
meetings. Some of the older women attend meetings and voice their opinions. Since they directly
represent women’s interests, they are encouraged to speak. However what seems more important
for women’s participation is the informal social network. Women are more comfortable discussing
issues when they are interacting during the course of their daily work. This also seems to be the
channel by which older women can communicate the decisions of the gram sabha to the younger
ones, and receive their inputs.

Impacts of the community initiative

The villagers claim that the forest has shown remarkable regeneration since the protection
efforts started. With the regeneration of the forest, villagers report the presence (not continuous)
 Rajasthan 593

of two leopards in the forest. They have reportedly been preying on goats from the forest. As yet,
however, there does not seem to be any ill-feeling among the villagers. The shepherds keep a
sharp vigil while their sheep graze. The elders claim that the disappearance of tigers and other
predators from the forest was the reason behind the depletion of forests. They maintain that the
presence of predators will inhibit people from going into the forest unless absolutely necessary,
and thereby aid the conservation process.

State of the forest

The following observations are made on the basis of the ecological assessment carried out by us.
The forests occur on a variety of rock and soil formations and thus vary in composition, depending
on the factors that control them. The most common tree species found is dhok, a slow-growing
species with a height of up to 12 m at places. Due to continuous hacking and grazing, this species
has been reduced to scrambling bushes. On the higher slopes and plateaus, salar is found. The tree
species are interspersed with shrubs mainly in the valleys. While the plains exhibit extensive grass
growth, grass cover can be seen only where there is soil on the forest floor and is restricted to the
plateaus. Dhok regenerates only in areas where the villagers have undertaken some protection
activities.
Dhok was seen to regenerate in the valley (Satala ka Nala) next to the dam while the slopes
of the hillocks were devoid of any regenerating tree species. Since the vegetation in the valley is
thick, forming a formidable cover, goat penetration is minimised, thereby allowing plants to be
recruited into the higher age, height and girth groups. Further, the dhok that are regenerating
(one-year-olds) are in the cracks and crevices on the slopes.
According to some of the villagers, the forest has been in the present state for the last 8-10
years. This strengthens the theory that grazing has been intensive in the region. On the upper
reaches of the hills one can also see extensive lopping for firewood, thus opening up the forest.
The slopes of the hills are devoid of any soil and humus that can support plant life during the dry
months. On the contrary the plateaus on the tops of the hills have a number of termite mounds,
which is indicative of good soil quality.
It seems that pressure due to grazing is still quite high in these forest areas. The barren slopes
that are seen on the slopes of the hillocks near Bhaonta are due to the combined effect of both
hacking and grazing. Whatever regeneration is seen is probably due to elimination of lopping of
trees. Kanhaiyalal, a member of the gram sabha of Bhaonta village, also agrees that grazing is
still intense and occurs in the regenerating patches of the forest. Ever since the cessation of tree
felling, the vegetation has grown and partly closed up the gaps, thereby protecting the seedlings
of dhok. What is seen as a thick forest today can be called a ‘coppice forest’ (which is a result of
re-growth from stumps and stalks) and not one that has regenerated (grown) from the seeds.

Availability of resources
According to the villagers, the most visible change in the village is the presence of water as
indicated by the recharged wells and greenery in the village. The water collected in johads during
the monsoons is used for irrigation and other daily necessities. The villagers say that after 1990
there has been a rise in productivity and two crops can easily be grown in a year. Since wheat has
proven to be the most productive, most farmers prefer to grow it. But maize and chana are also
important parts of their diets and are grown by almost all farmers. The cropping pattern may vary
according to the relative availability of water.
With the success of forest protection and the
case studies - rajasthan

consequent improvement in the soil, villagers are

thinking of ways to develop unutilised lands as
alternative sources for fuel and fodder. A gauchar
(pasture) is being proposed as part of this effort.
The livestock has become more productive due to
the increased availability and security of fodder.
Most villagers say that fodder was available even in
the pre-protection days, but it was decreasing every
year and there was no sense of security. They now
feel secure with the regeneration of the forest.
Forest protection committee members at
Bhaonta Kolyala Photo: Ashish Kothari
594 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Controlled outward mobility

During the period of resource shortage, many men were compelled to serve as seasonal labourers
in bigger towns. Most worked as manual labourers in mills and factories. There has reportedly been
a decrease in migration in recent years and very few villagers seek employment elsewhere out of
compulsion; data on this was however not available. Agriculture and animal husbandry seems to
suffice for most households.

Constraints and opportunities

Intra–village dynamics
Though relatively harmonious in its internal functioning, there are a few existing or potential
inequities in the village that could have a bearing on this initiative. The balais feel that they are
being discriminated against. They had wanted to resettle some of the households in a sawai chak
(unused land, belonging to the FD) area in the village. They claim that the gujjars built a johad
on that area to prevent them from settling down there. According to some of the gujjars active in
the process, this is true. Apparently there had been some encroachments in the sawai chak areas
and the johad was built to ensure that the land remains the common property of the village and
is not appropriated by individuals or a community. The balais also feel that while one of the rajput
families was allowed to settle on land that belongs to the FD, the balais are not allowed to. The lack
of full participation by women (especially the younger ones) could be such a constraint, though
villagers do not seem to articulate this. The rest of the villagers say that the FD itself will ask the
rajputs to evacuate the area and do not seem too keen to interfere. Though the balai have not
raised this issue with the gram sabha and are not sure if they ever will, they appear disenchanted
with the conservation process as they feel that their interests have been compromised. This may
eventually weaken the support to the initiative.

Inter-village conflicts
Since there are many villages in the vicinity, it has not been easy to guard against offenders. The
villagers of Bhaonta-Kolyala say that since many of these villages do not have their own forest,
they rely on other forests in the region. They therefore have no objection to neighbouring villages
using the forest area to graze, but they will not permit violation of the regulations laid down by
them. Some also feel that these villages could try to develop their own areas for fuel and fodder.
The older patterns of forest use are not feasible anymore. Earlier, due to the abundance of forest
land, even those villages which did not have forests in the immediate neighbourhood had unopposed
access to the forested areas in the region. However this pattern has become unsustainable due
to the depleting forests and increasing human and livestock populations over the last 30 years.
Some of the other villages in Thanagazi tehsil have initiated protection of their forests and are
very intolerant of encroachments or infringements by neighbouring villages, even resorting to
violence against offenders. This has increased the pressure on the Bhaonta forest. At present, the
state of the forests in these areas seems better than the Bhaonta forest. The people in Bhaonta-
Kolyala say that, unlike these other villages, they would not like to take recourse to violent means
or threats. According to them a movement based on intimidation is not sustainable. They would
prefer a change in attitudes and thoughts, even if this takes longer.
The gram sabha seems to be unable to respond unregulated use by outsiders as it did in the
early years. Perhaps one reason for this is the challenge to its right over the forest. The traditional
legitimisation invoked by the gram sabha on the basis of the old jagirdari boundary is not recognised
by the adjoining villages, who are aware of the more recent official status of the forests.

Relations with forest department

The villagers claim that the forest department has never been supportive. A few
high-ranking officials who visited the village made laudatory notes in the gram
sabha register. But this has not translated into any real support at the ground
level. According to them, the FD staff at the local level (forester and forest guard)
are invited to the monthly meetings but they seldom attend. The FD staff feels
that they have proven their support by attending some of these meetings, and
express their inability to attend every meeting due to other official duties. There is
a severe lack of communication between the village community and the FD, which
has resulted in mutual mistrust and hostility. Initiating a dialogue or developing a
 Rajasthan 595

system of communication may help in improving the relations between the two, but this may
require the intervention of a third party.

Box 3
President’s Award10
On 28 March 2000, the efforts of the villagers of Bhaonta-Kolyala were given the highest
official recognition. The first Down To Earth–Joseph C. John Award for the most outstanding
environmental community was presented by the President of India to Bhaonta-Kolyala. The
award carried a citation and a cash award of Rs 1,00,000. Seven villagers, including two
women, received this award on behalf of the communities. This recognition has encouraged the
villagers to carry forward their hard work, which had so far been unacknowledged.

Presence of Tarun Bharat Sangh

TBS has played a crucial role in the initiation and success of this effort. TBS works with workers
from the villages itself. Their knowledge of the local language, geography, and ecological and social
contexts are central to the success of the works undertaken by them. Most workers are graduates
who have over the years gained knowledge through experience. For the organisation the process
by which projects are implemented are as important as the goal. The process helps in building the
capacity of the local community to fulfil their aspirations. It pursues a participatory approach in
its work in a manner that the responsibility of the work lies with the local community more than
it does with the organisation. The workers seem to have perfected the method of identifying and
adopting ways to transfer the responsibility to the local communities at the very beginning of their
work.
TBS views itself as a facilitator in the various activities it carries out. It recognises and encourages
the right of the people to take their own decisions. It only provides the necessary inputs to enable
the community to take decisions concerning their livelihood. All activities related to the initiative
come within the decision-making framework of the communities.
For the villagers, TBS represents a support structure. In fact, it is the only outside institution that
they would like to be associated with. Though the organisation has more or less now withdrawn from
the village, the villagers retain strong links with it. They continue to participate in the awareness
campaigns run by TBS and have gone to other parts of the country to share their experiences with
others. Such sharing of ideas and experiences from one region to another could help influence
similar initiatives in other areas as well. TBS continues to help in generation of funds for the
villagers if they need to take on any development activity.

Box 4
The Arvari Sansad-A unique initiative with other villages
At a meeting held in Hamirpur village in 1998, a collective decision was taken by villagers
situated on the catchment of the Arvari River (including Bhaonta-Kolyala) to form a sansad
(parliament) that could help regulate resource use in the catchment. Elected members from
34 of the 70 villages situated in the catchment attended the meeting. These representatives
took a decision to form a 90-member parliament that would lay down guidelines concerning
jal, jungle aur jamin (water, forest and land). During the forest session, issues like mining,
forest felling, hunting and over-utilisation of groundwater were discussed. A 15-member
coordinating committee was formed, headed by Kanhaiyalal Gujjar (of Bhaonta) and Chajjuram
case studies - rajasthan

of Samra village. They were entrusted with the responsibility of preparing a guideline for
resource utilisation in the catchment based on suggestions arising out of the discussions. These
guidelines have been ratified by the parliament. A committee has been formed to identify
those forest officials that are known for their sincerity, so that the sansad could enter into
collaboration with the FD. According to the members, though there is a strong will among the
villagers, forest guards could be of help in enforcing regulations. It is hoped that, through a
process of dialogue with the FD, a collaborative network for conservation can be built up. TBS
is at present acting as the facilitator but hopes to withdraw once the sansad has established
a working office and is fully functional. The rules and regulations for the utilisation of natural
resources include:
• No one is allowed to draw water directly from the river for irrigation, after Holi,11 as the lean
596 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

flow season starts then. However water may be drawn directly for livestock even after Holi.
• Before Holi, in the areas that are directly irrigated by the waters of Arvari, only sarson and
chana may be grown. During the kharif rains, however, any crop may be grown apart from
sugarcane and rice.
• Only crops that require less water should be grown in the areas that are irrigated from the
wells near the river.
• Vegetables are to be grown only according to local needs.
• People should be penalised for growing sugarcane and rice against the advice of the sansad.
• The use of organic fertilisers to avoid soil degradation, damage to lands and to help retain
moisture should be attempted.
• Production should be for local needs.
• Direct relations between the producers and the buyers should be established.
• Water should not be drawn from the river using pumps.
• The waters of the Arvari should not be used for commercial purposes or for mining
operations.
• Digging borewells to draw water should not be allowed in the Arvari catchment.
• Villagers should keep watch over people who hunt.12
• Areas that are affected by hunting are to be identified.
• A tiger protection programme should be developed, as the presence of tigers would act as a
deterrent to hunting.
• Put an end to all mining activities in the area.
• Lands that have suffered due to mining should be regenerated.
• Sale of land to outsiders should be prevented.
• There should be a total ban on the cutting of green trees.
• Grazing of livestock from outside areas in the Arvari catchment should be prevented.
• Cutting of grass, etc. should begin only after Deepavli13, after the pastures have had a chance
to regenerate during the monsoons.
• Pastures in the villages for livestock should be developed.
• Denuded hill slopes should be afforested.
• Revive traditional conservation methods.
• These methods should be written down by the educated youth of the region.
• Rules of the sansad should be arrived at and enforced with consensus and discipline.
• The sansad has been established for guiding natural resource use in the Arvari catchment.
• The sansad should work for self-sufficiency of village communities and for the disciplined use
of natural resources in the Arvari region.

Conclusion
Several important lessons emerge from the experience of Bhaonta-Kolyala. Perhaps one of the
reasons why people of Bhaonta-Kolyala were inspired toward forest protection was the manner
in which the linkages between forest, water and agriculture were highlighted by TBS. This may
have only required a few helpful hints by TBS, as the villagers traditionally understood such
linkages anyway but had lost this understanding due to various processes of alienation. What
TBS would also have helped to do is to link the village’s efforts to larger social, economic and
ecological processes. A perspective such as this brings the concept of conservation closer to the
people. The perception of ‘nature’ here is not that of a ‘wilderness’ but rather of a continuum of
human-made and influenced ecosystems where non-human natural elements co-exist with, and
relate intimately to, human ones. In the last few years, the villagers have seen the links between
 Rajasthan 597

forests, agriculture, pastoralism and livelihoods working, with a little effort on their part, to their
advantage. Forest protection is therefore a part of the larger livelihood strategy in the village, but
also has, at least for some of the villagers, an ethical and moral component. Perhaps this could
explain the overwhelming support for forest conservation in the village.
It is important to keep in mind that the conservation initiative has been a process of empowerment
for the village. It has not only meant construction of water-harvesting structures and formulating
forest regulations but also the evolution of a new sense of the collective ‘self’ based on their
successes. The people of Bhaonta-Kolyala now feel confident to assert their rights to, and de facto
ownership over, common property natural resources, even though there is no governmental or
statutory recognition of this. It also resurrected the sense of collective and individual responsibility
toward natural resources, which is essential for the success of community-based conservation.
The emphasis on the formation of the gram sabha as the decision-making body has ensured
that the community retains, to a large extent, the power and responsibility to take decisions. All
activities concerning natural resource use have been kept within the decision-making framework
of the village. Even the area’s panchayat, the official decision-making body relevant for the village,
does not have a say in how the villagers of Bhaonta-Kolyala use their natural resources. The
reasons for this non-involvement are, however, not clear. As a dominant voice in the village and
the gram sabha, the Gujjars have played a crucial role in initiating and sustaining the conservation
process. The Balais feel that their concerns are not taken into account. In the long run, this may
influence their support for forest protection as well.
It is also evident that de facto ownership or control is not adequate. In Bhaonta-Kolyala, the
inability to prevent neighbouring villagers from felling trees has been demoralising. The absence
of any formal authority has made the initiative vulnerable to questions of legitimacy. We feel that
along with the will of the resident communities to save forests, there also needs to be a statutory
support structure which has the authority and infrastructure to enforce that will. At present such
authority rests only with the FD. It would perhaps be helpful to collaborate with the FD, but in the
long run, statutory powers need to be given to the community itself, with the FD acting as facilitator
and mediator in disputes with outsiders. Unfortunately, the present sense of distrust between both
the parties precludes the possibility of such collaboration in the near future. Initiating a dialogue
would be a step in the right direction, and TBS may be in the best position to do this.
The assertion of de facto control is not restricted to Bhaonta-Kolyala. While attending the
February 1999 session of the Arvari sansad (Arvari parliament), we felt that villagers from across
the catchment shared this experience of empowerment and that a new collective identity was
being formed in the process of discussions. This could help to overcome, to a certain extent, the
occasional disempowerment that villagers of Bhaonta-Kolyala feel when dealing with neighbouring
villagers, even if legal authority is not vested in them.
Finally, local leadership plays a very important role in any community initiative. Though the
village still looks to TBS as a support structure, over the years it has also evolved its own strong
leadership. This comprises individuals like Kanhaiyalal Gujjar and Chhotelal Gujjar who work with
TBS (and are often out of the village), are educated and can negotiate with relevant authorities like
the FD. On the other hand, people like Arjan Gujjar and Dhanna Baba (both respected elders) live
and work in the village and play the important role of enthusing the village community to rally for
a common cause. Emergence of a second level of leadership could play a strong role in sustaining
the initiative.
The model for conservation that has emerged from the efforts of Bhaonta-Kolyala indicates that
conservation of natural resources need not be in opposition to the livelihood needs of resident
communities. It holds promise as an alternative form of conservation, and is pragmatic in societies
and areas where the majority of the population is directly dependent on natural resources for
survival.
case studies - rajasthan

This case study has been adapted from S. Shresth and S. Devidas, Forest Revival and Water
Harvesting: Community Based Conservation at Bhaonta-Kolyala, Rajasthan, India (Pune,
Kalpavriksh and International Institute of Environment and Development, 2001).
598 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

For more details contact:

Kanhaiya Gujjar
Village Bhaonta-Kolyala
Taluka and P.O. Thanagazi
District Alwar
Rajasthan
Ph: 01465-225043
0141-2393178, 09414019456

Endnotes
1
There are some 200 water-harvesting structures built along the catchment of this rivulet. Over a period of ten years,
these structures have replenished ground water and increased the water table, enabling the river to flow perenially
again.
2
TBS is a local NGO that has been active in promoting a community-based movement toward floral, faunal and
water conservation in the region for the last 15 years. Conservation of natural resources in the region has evolved
as a process of growing self-awareness, self-sufficiency and understanding of the natural world for both the resident
communities and TBS.
3
Jagirdars were landlords who during the princely times had been awarded lands by the state. They were exempt
from paying taxes.
4
H.G. Champion and S.K. Seth, A Revised Survey of Forest Types of India (Delhi, Government of India, 1968).
5
Administrative Reports for the State of Alwar (1877-1912). Alwar State Publications.
6
Source: R. Samantray, Johad: Watershed in Alwar District, Rajasthan (Delhi, UN Inter-Agency Working Group on
Water and Environmental Sanitation, 1998).
7
Panchayat is the lowest formal administrative body consisting of elected representatives from one or more
villages.
8
Editor’s note: An investigation carried out in 2005 however has revealed that there are no tigers left in Sariska. This
revelation has caused much debate in the country and has led to a number of investigations in other national parks
and sanctuaries. This discovery also led the Prime Minister to constitute a Tiger Task Force. The recommendations of
this task force have resulted into an amendment in the Wildlife Protection Act in 2006, constituting a Tiger Authority
in the country to be able to check the declining population of tigers, including through the participation of the local
people.
9
The villagers popularly refer to it as sonchirri. Sonchirri also derives from son (golden) and chirri (bird). We have
not been able to establish if this refers to an actual species that existed or exists in the area.
10
Source: Anon. ‘Awarded: Bhaonta-Kolyala’, Down to Earth, 30 April 2000.
11
Holi is a festival that is celebrated in the month of March.
12
We did not hear any incidence of hunting in or near Bhaonta-Kolyala.
13
Deepavali is a festival that is celebrated during October or November.
 CCA/Raj/CS2/Alwar/Kishori/Water harvesting and forest protection

Kishori village, Alwar

Background
Kishori village is located in Alwar district of Rajasthan. This village, like Bhaonta-Kolyala (see
case study for details), was once in the drought prone zone. Because of the efforts of the villagers
along with the NGO Tarun Bharat Sangh (TBS), the resources have now regenerated and the River
Arvari has turned into a perennial river supporting local agriculture. The main occupations of the
villagers are agriculture and cattle grazing.

Towards community conservation

The forest cover of Aravalli hills was once lush and green but its condition deteriorated in the
course of time due to felling of trees and negligence by the villagers. After Independence, a greedy
local prince auctioned most of the blocks of the forest. Subsequently the rainwater started running
down into the valleys, eroding the fertile topsoil instead of seeping into the earth. The village
women had to travel long distances for a pot of water. There was no grass for cattle. Most of the
villagers of Gopalpura village migrated to Gujarat in the fifth year of the drought. The Arvari rivulet
was barely wet in the monsoons and the check-dam constructed in the past was worn out, with the
villagers not in a position to do anything about it.
In October 1985, a young social worker Rajendra Singh, along with four of his friends, came
to Kishori village. They mobilised the villagers into finding a solution to their problem of scarcity
of water, and organised people to contribute labour voluntarily (shramdaan) towards repairing,
de-silting and deepening their own ponds. They also started building johads (small earthen check-
dams which capture and conserve rain water, improve percolation and recharge groundwater).
Rajendra Singh sought help from an engineer friend named Yogendra for repairing the 1400 ft
long, 20 ft high and 50 ft wide check-dam that existed on the river. The dam was too big to be
repaired by the villagers alone, so they had to engage external labour. Payments to the external
labourers were made from donations by the villagers. That year the villagers were able to irrigate
600 bighas of land. The success of this initiative led to the formation of Tarun Bharat Sangh (TBS)
with Rajendra Singh and a number of local members.
Subsequently, similar efforts were carried out in Gopalpura village (another village along the
river Arvari) as well. As a result of these efforts, the Arvari changed into a perennial rivulet over
the next decade. In neighbouring Hamirpur, which was once a desert-like village, there is now a
sparkling Jabbar Sagar, a reservoir built by the TBS and the villagers with teeming aquatic life
surrounded by thick vegetation.

Box 1
A struggle against mining
When Rajendra Singh started work in Sariska, he realised that all the rain water disappeared
case studies - rajasthan

into the marble mines. When Sariska was declared a national park in 1978, all the villagers
were denied their livelihood. Most of the villagers left the village and the others started working
in the mines owned by people like Subhash Ghai, Balram Jakhar and Bhairon Singh Shekhawat.
The mines were death traps for the tigers in the sanctuary. In 1990 the TBS moved the
Supreme Court against mining in Sariska and got an order in its favour the next year. But the
Rajasthan Government wanted the mines to run and they filed false affidavits. There were
attacks on the TBS volunteers as well. There was an attempt made in 1990 when a car in which
Singh was a passenger was smashed by mine owners. He was travelling with a judge, Justice
M.C. Jain, who made a note of the incident and the mine owner was punished. The court also
directed the Union Government to declare Aravalli a fragile ecosystem and ban mining. But the
miners got a notification in their favour in which only the districts of Alwar and Gurgaon were

599
600 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

declared fragile. TBS launched a three-month satyagraha in January 1993, blocking the roads
to the mines. The mine owners filed 42 false cases against Singh, which were not upheld. Later,
a forest officer, Fateh Singh Rathore, understood the problems of the villagers and befriended
them. This led the villagers to frame rules for forest protection and start water harvesting,
which resulted in regeneration of life in the village and the forests as well.

Kishori, Gopalpura and Hamirpur are among the 70 villages that joined hands in the late 1990s
to constitute the Arvari Sansad in 1998 with the objective of preserving and protecting the entire
stretch of the river (see Box 4 in the case study on Bhaonta-Kolyala for details). Along the stretch
of the river and in the regenerating catchment forests in the villages, a number of local rules apply
for sustainable management of resources, including hunting and green-felling bans. So deeply
ingrained is the ecological importance of the river and surrounding forests in the people’s minds
that the villagers had once launched a 100-day satyagraha forcing the government to cancel the
fishing contracts for the reservoir that the villagers had built1.Within the villages, if even a single
fish is caught, the village gram sabha imposes a fine of Rs 1100.
In another hamlet called Mala Tolawas, a TBS volunteer advised two women, Gyarsi and Phoola,
to start digging a pond. They were the only 2 villagers who were left in that hamlet. Encouraged
by TBS, they started digging a pond and within four months, with periodic help from TBS, they
finished the task. In a period of two years the pond was full round the year. This is where the
concept of Mahila Mandals started in this region. The women set up a cooperative bank in which
each member contributes Rs 10 a month. This money can be borrowed in the lean period by the
members at a low interest rate.
Within Kishori and the neighbouring villages, there are certain rules and regulations for usage of
rainwater and groundwater. Water-intensive crops such as sugarcane are not grown. Initially the
various government departments were not in favour of the water harvesting structures being built
by the TBS and the villagers. They claimed them to be illegal, but later on the irrigation department
started collaborating with TBS. However, other departments took a little longer to come around.
For example, when TBS motivated the villagers to plant trees in the catchments of the johads
to check excessive silting, the State Revenue Department imposed a fine of Rs 5000 for illegally
planting trees on its land.

Impacts of community conservation

Due to the collective efforts of the TBS and the villagers, the village has witnessed many
progressive changes. There is a perceptible increase in the forest cover (a systematic study of
the ecological impact of these efforts and impact on forest management needs to be carried out).
According to the villagers and TBS volunteers, the soil erosion has reduced from 80 per cent to
5 per cent. Earlier the water table was below 200 ft, which is now claimed to have risen to 20 ft.
Through these efforts and constant interactions with the outside agencies, both government and
non-government, the villagers have gained self-confidence. Increased availability of water has
improved the socio-economic situation because of improved agricultural conditions. Earlier villagers
grew crops such as chana and sarson in kharif (summer crop) and jowar and bajra in rabi (winter
crop), but now the varieties of crops have changed to wheat, barley, sugarcane and vegetables in
rabi and corn, akhar, jowar, kala jeeree and vegetables in kharif. They also grow kharbooza (musk
melon) and lauki in rabi and tarbooz and fodder in late winter. The village, which earlier had to buy
most of its requirements from outside, now supplies grain, ghee, cotton and salt to the market.

Opportunities and constraints

The villagers faced some hurdles from the government agencies initially, but government agencies
are now convinced of the villagers’ efforts and are collaborating with the villagers.

Conclusion
This case study reflect how a ‘black zone’ (drought-prone) area had been transformed into a
‘white zone’ (water-surplus) area due to the efforts of the TBS, backed by the support of the
villagers. It contradicts the myth that the drought situation is due to the failure of the monsoons
alone. This is an example of successful conservation and water harvesting, whose results comply
with the villager’s social and economic needs.
 Rajasthan 601

This case study has been compiled based on information provided by Vijaya Pushkarna in her
write up ‘Kiss of life for Mother Earth’, published in The Week, 27th December, 1998; and on
information provided by Soma Basu in her write-up ‘Hope in the midst of loss’, published in The
Hindu, 25th June 2000.

For more details contact:

Kanhaiya Gujjar
Village Bhaonta-Kolyala
Taluka and P.O. Thanagazi
District Alwar
Rajasthan
Ph: 01465-225043-
0141-2393178, 09414019456

Endnotes
1
Interestingly, once the river rejuvenated and the reservoir was built by the villagers, the government stepped in
to auction the contracts for catching fish in the reservoir, much against the wishes of the villagers. This had to be
withdrawn after stiff resistence from the local people.

case studies - rajasthan

 CCA/Raj/CS3/Karauli/Kailadevi/Forest protection

Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary, Karauli

Background
The Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary (KWS) is the northern extension of the Ranthamboree National
Park and falls within the buffer zone of the Ranthamboree Tiger Reserve. The sanctuary is located
in the Karauli district of Rajasthan and falls within the Karauli and Sapotra blocks. It is spread over
a total area of 674 sq km, falling within the longitudes 76°37’ E to 77°13’ E and latitude 26°2’ N
and 26°21’ N. The sanctuary is bounded on the west by the river Banas and on the south by the
river Chambal.
Even prior to the declaration of the sanctuary in 1983, the forest area that now comprises the
sanctuary has been home to several pastoral and agricultural communities who are dependent
substantially on its resources for their livelihood.
Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary, otherwise a little-known PA, has become a popular reference among
environmentalists and conservationists for the community-initiated forest protection committees
(referred to as kulhadi bandh panchayats) that are operational in the area. These forest protection
committees prevent the carrying of axes into the forests, a symbol of protecting the forests.
Following these initiatives there have been several measures by the FD to collaborate with the
people.
This case study reflects on these organised efforts that the communities in and around the
sanctuary have made towards protecting their forests and those of the sanctuary. The research on
which this case study is based was conducted in two phases: one in which the area had a number
of self-initiated community conservation efforts and the second in which the forest department
intervened for promoting community-based conservation. This case study is thus a comparative
one, analysing the functional dynamics of the community-based conservation efforts over a
period of time. In the span of three years between the first phase (1996) and the second phase,
several changes and developments took place. These include changes in the management, more
active NGOs, consistently poor rainfall and the people in the villages becoming outwardly mobile.
The changes have had a significant bearing on the existence and operation of the community
initiatives in this area.

Profile of the sanctuary

The reserved forests of Kailadevi were
declared a sanctuary vide initial notification
No.P. (27) Raj group 8/83 dated 09/07/83,
covering an area of 674 sq km. These forests
were earlier protected forests, so declared in
1955. A final notification of the declaration
of the sanctuary has not been issued to
date. This is partly because the process of
settlement of rights (a requirement under the
Wild Life (Protection) Act before issuing the
case studies - rajasthan

final notification) is a complicated process.

The Settlement Officer is believed to have
submitted a report to the FD; this report
accepts all existing rights and concessions
to people living inside the sanctuary area.
A forested kho (ravine) in Kailadevi The FD has not yet accepted this report and
Photo: Ashish Kothari hence the final notification is pending.
The area under the sanctuary falls within the biogeographic zone 4 (semi-arid zone) and biotic
province 5 B (the Gujarat Rajwara Province).1 The vegetation is of the dry deciduous type with
a predominance of Anogiesus pendula, locally known as dhok. The vegetation is spread across
602
 Rajasthan 603

the three altitudinal levels of the sanctuary; the vegetation is also of three distinct kinds. In
the uppermost tabletop area there is an abundance of dhok. In the lower tabletop there is a
predominance of Euphorbia sp. and ber scrub. The lowermost level comprises mostly ravines with
flat land near the banks of the river Chambal.
The terrain is characterised by some valleys and river gorges, locally referred to as khos. On
account of higher moisture retention and cooler temperatures, these khos are the most suitable
habitats for wildlife and nurture a wide variety of flora and fauna. These khos
are considered (both by the FD and the local people) to be richest reserves of
biodiversity in the area. Common in this region now are sloth bears, nilgai,
sambar, cheetals or spotted deer, striped hyena, and Indian porcupine,
among a host of other species.
The most significant conservation value of the sanctuary is that it is
buffer to Ranthambore National Park. In the past, large parts of the
sanctuary, especially the khos regions, were maintained as hunting
reserves known as shikargahs.2 Today the possibility of existence of tigers in this area is
doubtful, though the FD claims otherwise.3
In 1991 the sanctuary was included in the Ranthambhor Tiger Reserve (RTR) and is under
the jurisdiction of the DFO (KWS) based in Karauli. RTR is one of the seven sites where the
International Development Agency (IDA) and Global Environmental Facility (GEF)-sponsored India
Ecodevelopment Project was implemented. 31 villages in the sanctuary were covered under this
programme. In each of these villages an Ecodevelopment Committee (referred to as EDC) was
constituted. Under the scheme a micro-plan was made for the individual villages by the FD in
consultation with the local villagers.
As per the figures of the FD there are about 36 villages and hamlets inside the sanctuary.
According to the local NGO, Society for Sustainable Development (SSD), there are about 41 villages
inside the sanctuary. The difficulty in assessment arises primarily from the fact that most revenue
villages have several hamlets that are far-flung. According to the FD, in 1996 there were about
1000 families living inside the sanctuary. Most of the villages are multi-caste in their composition.
Predominant amongst them are meenas (considered as scheduled tribes) and the gujjar (considered
as other backward classes). Otherwise most villages have a varying population of caste groups like
kumhars, malis, jatavs/bairvas, korins, khatiks, brahmans, dhobins, banias, fakirs, nais, telis, doms
and bhangis. In any given village, the majority of the population is comprised either of meenas or
gujjars: very rarely are the two communities found living together in the same village.
Most communities, irrespective of their caste affiliations, subsist on pastoralism and subsistence,
single-crop agriculture. On an average, the number of cattle heads per family varies between four
and 15. The cattle are of the local variety. Goats are few, mainly owned by the Bairva community.
They rarely keep sheep. Wage labour is increasingly an important source of livelihood, as the rainfall
for the past several years has been highly erratic. People work on the construction of roads and in
the legally and illegally operating mines (outside the sanctuary area).4 When the ecodevelopment
scheme was being implemented, some people managed to get wage labour. Sometimes labour
is also created through village development activities (such as water-harvesting structures, etc)
carried out by some NGOs, including SSD and Tarun Bharat Sangh (TBS), an NGO located in Alwar,
Rajasthan. These NGOs have been working on improving the water-harvesting structures in this
area. A number of men and boys have migrated to cities like Chennai, Ahemdabad and Bangalore,
in pursuit of wage labour in construction and masonry work.
The civic amenities in this area are poor. Karauli and Sapotra blocks, within which the sanctuary
is located, are reported to have very poor infrastructural facilities. Most villages are not connected
by roads and thus not serviced by buses. The Primary Health Centres (PHCs) located outside the
sanctuary are not easily accessible. This area faces an acute scarcity of water.
case studies - rajasthan

Because of the acute shortage of water, especially from March onwards,

every year the pastoralists undertake a seasonal cyclic movement between
geographical spaces of differing circumferences, primarily in search of
pasture and water. Most people living in and around the sanctuary are heavily
dependent on the resources of the sanctuary, such as fodder, fuelwood, non-
timber forest produce and timber for agriculture and house construction. Even
though timber extraction for personal use (house construction and agricultural
implements) is officially not permitted, this is a concession that the community-
initiated Forest Protection Committees (FPCs) make in the forest areas under
their jurisdiction. The quantity to be extracted is decided upon by common
consensus and is strictly in accordance with individual requirements. All the
604 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

local communities as well as the migratory graziers (and the villagers) who set up khirkarees
(cattle camps) are dependent on fodder resources from the sanctuary. This is partly obtained
by allowing livestock to graze openly in the sanctuary area and by lopping, with dhok being a
particularly preferred species.

External threats to the sanctuary

Migratory graziers & livestock: For the last 20 years, the forest ranges of Kailadevi and Sapotra
have been on the route for the Rabaris, migratory graziers of the Mewar region of Western
Rajasthan. In the initial years the Rabaris were given a stipulated number of permits to graze in
the region from July to September. With the declaration of the sanctuary, the Rabaris have been
banned from the area. According to official opinion they exert the highest biotic pressure in the
area besides causing irrevocable harm to the ground vegetation. From time to time there has also
been considerable unrest among the local people against the entry of migratory graziers into this
area. Consequent to the people’s as well as the official endeavours to try and divert their routes,
the entry of the migratory herds into the sanctuary has been completely banned since 1990.5
Mining: The region is rich in shale and sandstone, which is extensively mined in this part of
Rajasthan. Most mining activity inside the sanctuary was abandoned after its declaration. However
there are a number of mines operating around and very close to the sanctuary in areas like Albat
ki Gwari and Kajsingpura. Illegal mining activities are rampant in the protected forests (PFs)
adjoining the sanctuary. There are some suggestions that mining may even be taking place inside
the sanctuary due to the unclear status of boundaries.
Poaching: The Moghiyas (or Bargis as they are also known) are a hunter community that used
to reside in this part of Rajasthan. In the past they used to accompany local rulers on hunting
expeditions, besides providing crop protection to local villages. Apparently since the declaration
of the area as a PF and subsequently as a sanctuary, all their activities were branded as illegal,
although there are reports of their activities continuing till 1993. However, after an incident in
which two forest officials were killed in an encounter, the FD systematically cleared the area of
Bargis. There have been occasional instances of poisoning of animals. Recently the forest officials
nabbed a few people who posed as itinerants but were apparently poachers. The people of Nibhera
village (one of the villages involved in conservation activities) have reported that there have
been occasions when they have heard gunshots at night and have spotted persons believed to be
poachers. The FD however does not believe that there are any significant threats to wildlife from
poachers in the area.

Box 1
Impact of local people on the sanctuary and the sanctuary on the people
Strictly speaking, according to the provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, only a
limited number of privileges and concessions can be made available for resource utilisation. No
systematic studies or monitoring of resource use has been carried out in Kailadevi Sanctuary.
The positions held by the FD, local NGOs or even the local community on resource use and its
impact on sanctuary resources are therefore primarily opinions and assertions. According to
the FD, timber collection, fodder extraction, grazing of cattle (particularly through establishing
cattle camps deep inside the forests) and fuelwood collection are major sources of threats to
the sanctuary. The villagers confirm that under prevailing drought conditions (particularly in
years like 2000-01), incidents of tree felling, especially in the densely forested khos inside the
sanctuary increase.
The declaration of the sanctuary, and the subsequent imposition of regulations, has had several
impacts on the people. Shortages have been reported from most villages in the sanctuary for
fuelwood, fodder and timber. It is believed that partly because of the restrictions imposed,
coupled with the effects of resource scarcity, the necessity to migrate has further heightened.
In most villages their grazing areas have been denied and largely restricted to common grazing
lands and village forests. People have been denied access to timber even for personal use.
There have been allegations that very often lower-rank FD staff extort money for letting people
take away timber for household use. Even though people are allowed to take away headloads
for fuelwood, they are sometimes prevented from doing this, though it is not unusual for
someone based inside the sanctuary to witness large-scale fuelwood collection from the forests
or witnessing people moving in with their axes.
The closing of mines in and around the sanctuary has forced many people to migrate to distant
 Rajasthan 605

places in search of work wages. People feel that the absence of basic amenities prevents them
from venturing into alternative sources of income generation, including setting up dairies.
In the initial stages of declaration of the sanctuary, the local staff used the possibility of
relocation as a threat against the people. Although this is not the case after the initiation
of the ecodevelopment scheme, people continue to be uncertain about relocation from the
sanctuary.

Towards community conservation

Brief history
Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary was declared in 1983, but local people were not aware of the legal
status of the sanctuary till about early 1990. However, irrespective of the legal status of the area, a
people’s movement towards forest conservation started in this area in the late 1980s. According to
the local people, the immediate reason for the origin of this movement was to take action against
the migratory graziers—the rabaris.
Towards the end of the 1980s the forests in these areas had become severely depleted. Local
people attribute a number of reasons for the denudation of the forest cover and the depletion
of wildlife. The origins of these reasons lie in the period before the declaration of the sanctuary.
According to them, first the British and later the independent Indian government’s forest policies
extensively exploited this area for revenue (e.g., timber extraction and charcoal making). The
British as well as the Indian royalty also used the area for game hunting. The Annual Administrative
Report of Karauli State for 1912-13 states that the local ruler had hunted down about 213 tigers
between 1886 and 1912. The maximum extent of degradation in this area took place in the 1970s
and 80s, when this area was subject to excessive exploitation of various kinds: coupe-wise felling
of trees by the forest department for revenue generation, poaching and illegal felling. Thus, within
a span of 20-25 years the area saw drastic levels of depletion of forest resources.
Compounding the problem of the fast-depleting resources for the survival of the local communities
was the pressure exerted on the resources by the rabaris. From time to time there has been a
lot of unrest among the local people following the entry of these migratory graziers. According
to Ganpat, a vocal member of the movement, in 1986 the aggression of the rabaris became
intolerable. Hence, the 12 villages of Lohra Panchayat, unable to rely on the intervention of the FD,
which had apparently not been very forthcoming, organised themselves under the leadership of
Ramesh Rajouria, the ex-sarpanch of village Rajour and an activist of the Bharatiya Janata Party.
Thus the brewing tension took on the contours of an open conflict. The struggle with the rabaris
continued over a period of time, going on till 1994.6

Constitution of kulhadi bandh panchayats (KBPs)

The organisation of the 12 villages became famous as Baragaon Ki Panchayat. The villagers
realised that their resource base was threatened not only by the Rabaris but by the poachers, the
timber mafia and the local people themselves. Thus was born the idea of kulhadi bandh panchayat.
It was decided that the panchayat of the 12 villages would ensure that no one carried axes into
the village forests. They also decided to protect the forests within their village boundaries against
outside threats. Following the example of the Lohra Panchayat, various other panchayats (like the
Nibhera Panchayat that has about 8 villages under it) also adopted the practice.
In some villages like Chauriakhata, located in the
more interior parts of the sanctuary, the practice of KBP
evolved at later dates because of local circumstances.
case studies - rajasthan

According to the local narrative their panchayat started

only around 1990 after they witnessed a rapid depletion of
the forests in their immediate forests and simultaneously
felt the growing shortage of fuelwood and fodder.

Constitution and functioning of KBPs

The structures at the initial stages operated at two levels:
(i) Village level, and (ii) Apex level.
i Village-level: Every village has a political and administrative
panchayat (village executive). The KBP is adapted from and
606 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

in some cases constituted of the same body. The difference however was that the KBPs were/
are convened to discuss the specific issues of forest protection alone and also adopt a set of
regulations and rules pertaining to the same. Besides they take on the additional responsibility of
keeping vigil over the village forests. Further the KBP met at more regular intervals as compared
to the village panchayat. Structurally, in most villages it is ensured that almost all families in the
village are represented as constituent members of the KBPs. Panch patels, the handful of village
elders who are the chief spokespersons and key decision-makers on all issues pertaining to the
village were also responsible for enforcing the various norms and regulations of this committee.

ii Apex-level: A number of villages officially falling under the administration of a single formal
political panchayat as designated under the Panchayati Raj system.7 Generally some of the
panch patels represent their respective villages at this level. The apex body may, subject to
circumstances, also include villages outside this panchayat. This body is generally convened
to settle inter-village disputes among the member villages over resource use or refusal by any
member village to adhere to the prescribed norms of the KBPs.
The first apex body was that of the Lohra Panchayat (Baragaon ki Panchayat). There are however
villages like Chauriakhata and Kased that have no such apex bodies. The apex bodies seemed
useful in ensuring that unsteady village-level KBPs do not break too easily. The KBPs were most
unsteady in villages like Raher and Kased, which did not have such apex-level affiliations.

Issues of equality and representation

In their constitution the KBPs tend to be remarkably representative. KBPs, both at the village level
and the apex level, comprise members from almost all castes/communities residing in the village.
While the various castes continue to practice their customary social discriminatory practices, every
caste has an equal say in these panchayats. In their informal administrative village panchayats,8
almost every caste, with the exception of chamars (they are taken to be complete outcastes
and have a relatively small population in the village) has a representation among the patels.
The chamars may not have a representative but most certainly have an equal right to be heard.
The practice is also carried over to KBPs, which are, as mentioned earlier, adapted from the
village panchayats. The number of representatives is in proportion to their strength in the village.
Besides, villagers reinforce that though the decision-making rights are vested in the hands of the
patels, they cannot function in an autocratic manner. Further, by making every family a member
it is ensured that most of the village is represented and in turn equally shares the responsibilities
of the KBP.
The sense of equality is also reflected in the fact that in Maramda village the KBP had made
concessions for a chamar to lop more of the tender branches than permitted. The chamar, who had
no land or livestock, eked out a livelihood by selling baskets (dhokoli) made of these branches.
Involvement of women in KBPs is a complex issue. Gender discrimination is an integral part of
Rajasthani culture. In keeping with tradition, women are prohibited from speaking or even being
present in public forums. Thus on the face of it they do not take part in the KBPs. However, closer
examination of the society reveals that the women are as keenly aware of the functioning and
regulations of the KBPs as they are of any other village matter. They are the ones who do most of
the fuelwood collection in the village and it is not possible that their reservations about the rules
of the KBPs are not accommodated by the decision
making body. Thus while the villagers of Nibhera
claim that their KBP is still functional, at least in
principle, one can witness women taking axes into
the forests to collect fuelwood. The concession is
made, not to allow them to chop green wood but
to enable them to cut the dry and dead wood into
manageable sizes so that it is easier for them to
carry it back to the village.
The active involvement of women could be crucial
to issues of KBPs. As per law, a third of the seats
in the formal political panchayat are reserved for
women. The active participation of these women in
the KBPs can enable them to effectively represent Kulhad bandh panchayat meeting of twelve
issues of the KBPs in a larger political forum. villages at Kailadevi Photo: Ashish Kothari
 Rajasthan 607

Rules and regulations

The underlying principle of all regulations and rules formulated by the KBPs are that no one
harvests the forest resources in excess of their needs as well as safeguards the same from external
threats so far as possible.
All the villagers have equal responsibility in keeping a vigil on the forests and promptly reporting
to the patels about any untoward incident involving either people from their own village member
or people from other villages. Meetings are then convened to address such issue. No
action is taken against anyone unless witnesses as well as evidence are produced
in the panchayat meetings. However not many get away by lying. The surest
check against this is using religious sanctions against such acts. Irrespective of
whether there is a witness or not, a man refrains from lying after having taken
the oath of honesty in the name of the Goddess Ganga. This is known in local
parlance as ganga utthana.
They have instituted varying amounts of fines depending on the nature of the
offence. The KBPs may charge anywhere between Rs 11 and Rs 501. In general
they levy a sum of Rs 21 for minor offences and Rs 251 for major offences
involving a substantial amount of illegal felling. This money is then used as a
welfare fund for the village. Sometimes they also levy fines on those who, after
being summoned, failed to attend the KBP meetings.
In some villages the minutes of these meetings were maintained in a register. In
other villages like in Nibhera no records were ever maintained.
The KBPs have no legal standing. They enforce the rules and regulations by imposing their social
and religious sanctions.

Resource use for meeting personal requirements

Unlike the FD’s interpretation, the idea of ‘ banning the axe’ is not the same as not permitting
people to carry axes into the forests at all. Banning the axe is more a symbolic use of the phrase to
signify the resolve to protect the forests and give up indiscriminate felling. It must be appreciated
that the highest incentive for conserving the forests is to enable the sustained availability of
resources for their survival.
Thus, unlike the rules framed by the FD that at times put a total ban on the use and extraction
of some key forest resources, the KBPs have formulated flexible regulations that enable them
to meet their genuine needs. For example, the forest department clearly bans the extraction of
timber wood. The KBPs on the other hand permit the extraction of the same, albeit in a monitored
fashion. An individual has to state his requirement at the KBP meeting and has to seek approval
of the panchayat on whether the amount to be extracted is justified by his needs. The approval is
given only for basic necessity, depending on the occasion.
Similarly people are occasionally allowed to carry an axe into the forests only to chop the dry
wood into collectable sizes. While they do not object to carrying in an axe, they would certainly
take the person to task if the person came back with green wood. Thus, so long as their basic
principles are not compromised, the KBPS allow for some flexibility in the rules, only to facilitate
their day-to-day existence.
The year 2000 was a drought year in the region. In the months of May and June, by the people’s
own admission there was excessive felling and cutting in violations of all rules made by KBP. This
violation was explained within the same framework of ‘meeting their requirements’. The villagers
explained that there was an acute shortage of fodder in the area. Thus it was absolutely impossible
case studies - rajasthan

that they could deny anyone the right to extract the resources in excess. They justify this, saying
that if they cannot use the trees in their hour of need then what is the point of protecting their
forest at other times. After the drought conditions were over, the villagers are believed to have
again gone back to adhering to the laws of the KBPs. The FD helped in the process of going back
to the protection measures by helping in local employment through the ecodevelopment project.

Conflict resolution
The inter-village conflicts over natural resources are a constant feature, which are also effectively
handled by the KBPs. Conflicts over common property resources are generally settled by the
exchange of letters between the patels of the concerned villages. This letter has a great social
608 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

bearing. The inter-village relationships are subject to the manner in which these letters are written
and responded to. They also influence the manner in which the conflicts are resolved. Often the
villages that refuse to comply can be socially boycotted, as the Baragaon ki Panchayat has done
with Pitupura village. Most KBPs, like in Chauriakhata village, have carefully preserved letters that
they write to the offending village. These letters often have either the signature or the thumbprints
of the patels and all those people who are present at the time of drafting of the letter.
Such conflict-resolution mechanisms are far less successful between villages where multi-village
panchayats do not exist. Chandelipura village, for instance, did not have a KBP and the dispute
with its neighbouring village had resulted in a physical fight between the two villages. Neither of
the villages felt bound to pursue the process of mutual exchange of letters. Besides, they had
no apex body to refer the case to. Sometimes the FD has also been requested by the villages to
intervene on their behalf to prevent neighbouring villages from violating the norms of the KBPs
inside the boundaries of their village forests.

The relations/ collaboration of KBPs with other organisations

The KBPs and the informal village panchayat
The KBPs have been adapted from the village panchayat. In some cases like Lakhruki, the KBP
remained distinct from the administrative village panchayat. The decision-making powers in both
cases were vested with the patels. A distinction is made between the two institutions because
they are not only structurally (with a defined membership of sorts) but also functionally different.
However in some cases the KBP may be different functionally but not structurally. Within the same
structure, when the informal panchayats adopt a special emphasis on forest protection and meet
to take decisions on forest-related issues, they are referred to as KBP meetings. In any case it
appears that the ties between the two are very close and the differences very slight.

KBPs and the formal political panchayats

The KBPs are mostly village-level panchayats and have very little to do operationally with the
formal political panchayat. However the sarpanchs from the formal panchayats have had a significant
role to play in the KBPs in their respective villages. It may not be entirely untrue to state that their
involvement has been partially related to the idea of political mileage. Most people who have been
in the forefront of this movement have either been ex-sarpanchs or aspiring sarpanchs. It could
also be that they have a greater power in the village to be able to mobilise the local people. While
these sarpanchs have been active and encouraging in certain cases, their involvement has also
had negative impacts in other areas, particularly where the FD got involved. For example, the FD
had vested some powers in the sarpanch to be able to take offenders to task. However, according
to the people such powers hardly ever helped the KBPs because they were mostly abused to serve
the vested interest of the largely corrupt sarpanchs. The Eco-development Committees (EDCs) of
the FD often have the sarpanch as a member.

KBPs and the forest department

The KBPs have had a variety of relations with the FD. These relationships have largely depended
upon two major factors: first, the expectations of the people from the government-initiated
programmes towards participatory management, in particular the Joint Management Programme;
and, second, the FD’s appropriation of the KBPs to enable its initiatives in community-based
conservation. Of the latter there have been two: the van suraksha samitis (VSS) and the EDCs.

Joint Forest Management

Because of the fact that the FD is the authoritative body in the area, the villagers
saw ample scope for the FD’s intervention in KBPs, even though the villagers were not
well disposed towards the FD. Apart from their requirement for legal recognition, the
villagers, in their own understanding of joint management, feel the need for the FD’s
intervention at two levels: first, to handle external pressures, like migratory sheep,
mining, illegal felling, etc.; and, second, to handle situations within and between
villages that they are unable to address effectively at their own level.
 Rajasthan 609

Van suraksha samitis (VSSs)

The VSSs constituted in the area in 1985 under the Joint Forest Management (JFM) Scheme of
the forest department are no longer in existence today. According to the officials, they have all
been converted into EDCs, as JFM cannot legally be extended to PAs. Although the scheme was in
operation from 1985 till 1996, there were only five VSSs in the sanctuary area. These were also the
villages where KBPs existed earlier, and they had subsumed the VSSs. Most of these VSSs were
not successful and were seen by local people as a nexus between some powerful members in the
village and the FD. There are numerous stories of financial and other kinds of malpractices by the
members of the VSS.
One successful VSS was that of Rahar village, constituted in 1996 by the FD. The VSS in this
village could be constituted after much cajoling and coaxing by the FD. Initially the people refused
to be part of JFM, mainly because in the past whenever the villagers had either informed the FD of
indiscriminate cutting or sought their intervention on any other issue, the FD had been indifferent.
Finally when the VSS was constituted, the villagers chose the president and the members, and
the FD merely endorsed the same. The VSS functioned effectively for several meetings. They
managed to get forest guards who had failed to help them in checking some malpractice vis-à-vis
use of forest resources transferred. They even extracted a fine of Rs 11 from the members who
had abstained without explanation in the second meeting. However, soon the VSS scheme was
abandoned and the Ecodevelopment Project was initiated.

Eco-development committees (EDCs)

With the advent of the India Eco-development Project, FD officials (and to an extent the
villagers) claim that KBPs and VSSs in project villages have been converted to EDCs. These
EDCs are apparently established through a democratic electoral process. On paper and as per
procedure, the general body (GB) of the EDC comprises of a male and a female member from
every household in the village. A group of six members and a president (adhyaksh) elected from
the GB constitute a working/executive committee. Representing the FD, a forester is designated as
the member-secretary of the committee. His duty is to extend technical support and to document
the proceedings of meetings and other related issues. Sarpanchs are also taken to be members of
the working committees. The micro-plans are prepared in meetings of the EDC with the FD and are
thus considered to be drafted ‘in consultation with the villagers’. The money for work to be done
by the EDC is allotted on the basis of the number of families in a village. The village is granted a
sum of Rs 12500 per family. The people are meant to contribute about 25 per cent of the total cost
of the work undertaken and this is saved as a village welfare fund to be spent on the maintenance
of these structures once the project funding ceases. The allotted money is maintained in a joint
account of the member secretary and the adhyaksh of the EDC and the cheques released for
payment have to be co-signed by both.
Most villagers consider the EDCs as highly corrupt institutions. The adhyaksh is said to be a
product of favouritism on the part of the FD. Often it is alleged that instead of employing wage
labour as required by policy, the FD and the adhyaksh get the work done through contractors.
There is no transparency whatsoever in the accounts. In Raher the forester had been accused
of getting blank cheques signed. In almost every village the people are not happy with their
adhyaksh. They accuse him (the adhyaksh is always a man) of being hand-in-glove with the FD
and making money, and hence not presenting their grievances against the FD accurately. Most
villagers are also unhappy about the conversion of KBPs into EDCs.
Lakhruki has been one of the most exemplary KBPs in this area. The FD claims that the KBP today
functions as an EDC and is equally successful. However conversation with the villagers reveals
another reality. It appears that the informal KBP functions even today as it used to
case studies - rajasthan

in the past and is even today the main body in the village for forest conservation.
The EDC exists but most villagers are unaware of what it is all about, who its
members are and how it functions. (The same was also found to be the case in
other villages where EDCs have been functioning). Villagers understand that
some of the schemes for village development have been brought in by the
EDCs (e.g., the construction of waterworks and a fodder enclosure), providing
an opportunity for earning wage labour, and appreciate this. However, they
expressed their unhappiness about the lack of transparency in the functioning
of the EDC. Villagers also feel that the FD has failed to involve the people in the
EDCs.
The nature of participation in EDCs, even though slightly better than the VSSs,
remains a little questionable. Most adhyakshs are themselves unaware what an EDC
610 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

means except that it is a scheme of the FD to enable it to carry out development

work at the village level. An EDC is better understood in the villages as ‘rangewaren
ki samiti’ (a committee of the forest department). Very few members are aware
of their membership status. It is mandatory to have women members in the
working committee. The women who have been registered as members are not
even aware of their membership and do not have any idea about the EDCs.
Practically in every village, people complained that at the beginning of the
project, the adhyaksh, rather than being elected by the GB of the EDC, was
selected by the FD officials. They complained that the negotiations of the FD
are largely with the adhyakshs. The meetings for micro-plans however do
involve all villagers who want to be present. But because of the internal social
dynamics, very rarely are people able to speak out if they do not agree with
the adhyaksh. As seen in the case of Nibhera, sometimes the adhyaksh can
bypass the decisions taken at the EDC meetings if he does not agree with
them.
As for the issue of forest protection, villagers in Nibhera Maramda
and Ashaki villages claim that even though technically KBPs have been
subsumed under EDCs, they continue to function independent of and
outside their formal structure. In Nibhera, despite an acute shortage of
fodder due to drought in 2000, they still did not allow anyone to extract
fodder resources indiscriminately. In fact they had been disappointed with
the FD because it had not helped them in their effort to stop the neighbouring villages from
pilfering in their area.
Although the village KBPs are still the informal bodies for forest protection, the EDCs are seen
as a must for each village by the villagers because of the incentives that come with them. To an
extent the ambiguity about the relations between the KBP and the EDC also prevail because issues
pertaining to forest protection are discussed both in the periodic meetings of the EDC (where the
higher officials are also present) and in the villages’ own KBPs. However it must be noted that
EDCs are convened periodically at the behest of the FD and largely to discuss the agenda of the FD.
The KBPs, on the other hand, are convened by the villagers as and when the need arises.
The FD would like people to believe that the people are refraining from taking axes into the
forests in return for the incentives that they have been able to provide to the people through the
Ecodevelopment Project. The people claim that this is not the case. Their argument is simple.
They protect the forests in their own interest and thus they would continue to protect it with or
without the FD. However in a public forum with the FD, the villagers would never challenge the
FD’s claim because it is in their interest to maintain the goodwill of the FD, especially in order to
avail the incentives of the Ecodevelopment Project. This trend is seen in all villages: for example,
in Chauriakhata villagers display very little faith in the FD’s capability to protect the forests but are
still keen on the FD’s intervention because of the incentives. In several interviews with villagers,
the main advantage they saw in the EDC was that it gave them an opportunity for earning wage
labour.

KBPs and NGOs

The KBPs originated without the aid and assistance of any NGOs. In fact in 1996-97 the people of
this area were not at all aware of the NGO culture. They were wary of any NGO that came to work
in the area: for example, the Society for Sustainable Development (SSD) and a team from Indian
Institute of Public Administration (IIPA, an independent institution).
However, after interacting with these two groups for about a year, during which these NGOs
organised workshops for the interaction of the people with the FD, the villagers did see some role
for NGOs in facilitating the better working of KBPs with the FD. They especially felt the need for
NGOs to be involved as third parties in negotiations with the government-initiated activities. They
felt that NGOs could act both as conduits of accessibility and help to bridge the communication gap
that exists between the two parties.
Today SSD has soundly established itself and is working on several projects on natural resource
management in the sanctuary. Over the years the villagers have always relied on and consulted
Arun Jindal, Director, SSD, on all issues pertaining to the FD and to the Ecodevelopment Project.
In some villages, SSD has established village-level institutions, referred to as Village Development
Councils (VDCs). SSD has also started several self-help groups (SHGs) for promoting saving and
thrift among villagers. It appears that the meetings of the VDCs and SHGs also serve as forums
to discuss issues that were otherwise dealt with by the KBPs. In Nibhera, villagers explained that
 Rajasthan 611

people otherwise have very little time to gather for meetings, and since they make time for the
meetings of the SHG and the VDC, it serves as an effective forum to discuss these issues. So long
as the purpose is met, it really does not matter what forum is used for discussions and decisions
about forest protection. SSD itself claims that KBPs have been converted into VDCs.

Impacts of community conservation

Owing to the involvement of practically every family in the KBPs, everyone keeps a vigil on the
others. Even if a single individual creates a problem, the whole village may end up paying for it.
For instance, as is also done in their informal administrative panchayats, when the patels of the
concerned villages are summoned for decision-making to the offender’s village, the whole village
usually has to bear the cost of their hospitality. By the villagers’ own admission, this has to a large
extent checked the indiscriminate felling by local people. The FD also acknowledges that there
is some regeneration of forest cover in areas monitored by KBPs. However, no detailed scientific
studies have been carried out so far to confirm this observation.
The Forest Protection Committees (FPCs) have not only been effective in checking the villagers
but have in the past also accosted some FD officials, tried them in the FPC meetings, and levied
appropriate punishment. The KBPs also assist the FD in keeping a check on illegal activities. In the
past, there have been cases where they have taken culprits, mostly outsiders, to task first at their
own level and then handed them over to the FD. This has happened mainly in cases where villagers
have hauled trucks carrying illegal consignments of timber or other such big-scale offences. The
people however complain that most of the times the FD does not pay heed or does not take any
action against the offenders. The people place much more confidence in their own capabilities than
on the FD to check the irregularities.
Another achievement has been that being involved in KBPs has helped a number of people to
understand (at least to an extent) broader issues of ‘wildlife conservation’ as used in the FD’ s
parlance. Some display awareness regarding their position as stakeholders and their ‘right’ to have
a ‘say’ is decisions pertaining to the resources of the sanctuary. Such people however constitute
a small percentage and include mostly people who are politically very keen or are employed in
government service.

Limitations of community conservation initiatives

Based on the conversations related to forest use and protection with local people, forest officials,
NGOs and others, the following issues appear as limitations of the community conservation
initiatives in the sanctuary area.

Intra-community conflicts
The social dynamics of any community has a direct bearing on any such endeavours. There
have been several instances where intra-community conflicts have marred efforts at organising
KBPs. In Rahar, for instance, the initial attempts at forming a KBP had been disrupted by internal
dissension between the three predominant communities in the villages. Even at Kailadevi, the
Baragaon Ki Panchayat had not been able to stop the rampant illegal felling and
lopping of fuelwood. Pre-eminent among the various reasons put forward were the
disagreements based on caste differences and the feelings of being discriminated
against. The jatavs of Kailadevi, who admit to selling fuelwood from the sanctuary,
feel discriminated against by the FD. They complain that there are Meenas who
also indulge in the same activities; however, because they have stronger political
case studies - rajasthan

representation both at the state level and in the forest department, they tend to
be harassed much less by the authorities. As told by Ganpath Meena of Lakhruki,
the Baragaon Panchayat has not met for the last one and half years, as one of
the member villages has refused to pay up the fine that was levied on it.
In almost all villages there is definitely dissent between communities and this.
These implications are critical and have to be taken account of in proposing any
institutional arrangement for people’s participation, as has been evident in the
case of EDCs.
Another dimension of such conflicts is the allegations of favouritism and
nepotism on the part of the patels. Apparently such acts of favouritism are
carried out very subtly. In Maramda the villagers claimed that in many cases
the patels would carry out the full exercise for punishing an offender, but would
612 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

ultimately excuse him from the fine.

The issue of intra-community conflict is an important issue to be addressed. However it is
worthwhile to understand that because of the intra-community conflicts, the politics of the FD–
community interface leads to favouring of one community against the other. Also much of the
democratic and participatory policies are put to naught at the implementation level because of a
lack of understanding of the intra-community dynamics.

Box 2
Democracy and village dynamics
As in most villages, in Nibhera too the people were unhappy with their adhyaksh. The people
of the village claimed that they had no forum to redress their complaint. However, in 2000
a new DFO was deployed. He attempted to hold EDC meetings regularly and to follow the
curriculum of the EDC as per procedure. Since one year had already lapsed for most of the
EDCs, he conducted fresh elections of the heads of these committees. These fresh elections
provided an opportunity for the people to exercise their choice and remove the previous head.
Surprisingly however, in Nibhera the head was not changed in the elections. The DFO asked
the people whether they wanted to continue with the same head or would like him changed.
Not much response came from the crowd. They neither agreed nor disagreed. The DFO finally
declared that if they did not say anything the same head would continue, and eventually that is
what happened. Later when those who played a key role in the village, including the sarpanch,
were asked as to why they had not availed of the opportunity to change the head, they said
that he was a senior member of the village and it would not have been appropriate to let him
down in public and in front of the FD. He would have been hurt. They felt that the head himself
should have felt morally obliged to step down. Thus, while technically a democratic process was
effected, it still did not manage to capture the consensus of the people.

The lack of legal recognition of KBPs

In 1996-97 the greatest lack that the KBPs felt was some sort of legal sanction by the FD. The
need for legal empowerment was felt on several counts. First, it was important because sometimes
threats of social sanction were not strong enough for those offenders who were outwardly mobile
and were aware that these threats had no legal implications. Besides, with a gradual loosening
of the community’s religious and social ties, communities feel constrained without any officially
sanctioned powers. Second, it was necessary to enable them to check external threats against
which they could only use the threat of physical force. Third, they felt that legal empowerment was
also necessary to enable a wider functioning of the KBPs. For instance, they had suggested that
in cases of losses suffered by the villagers due to wild animals, the report of the affected person,
if endorsed by the FPC, should be considered valid and should be accepted by the FD (thereby
avoiding the delays and harassment of having to get official inspections conducted).
A team from IIPA had many discussions on this issue with the FD in 1996-97. Legal empowerment
of the KBPs would mean the devolvement of powers to them. The FD felt that the people, being
illiterate, were not adequately equipped to handle legal powers. Besides, denying the indifference
that the people accuse them of, the FD felt that the legal aspect of the issue could always be
forwarded to the FD. So far as the communities are concerned, they are asking for a joint arbitration
of cases. The people feel that in the event that a case could not be resolved by the KBP alone, it
should be jointly arbitrated by them and the FD, and 50 per cent of the fine levied should go to
the KBP.
Even in EDCs the issue of legal empowerment is elusive. The EDCs have been vested with no
legal powers. The FD continues to be the final arbitrating authority on all issues. In terms of
support of the FD, some villagers did acknowledge that it is better for them to refer cases of
offences, especially where the offender is adamant, through the EDC, as it has the authorisation of
the FD and the offender becomes a direct defaulter of the FD. It must be noted however that the
FD does not try the offenders through the EDC but deals with them directly. This either suggests
an undermining of the authority of the EDC or that the FD has empowered them only on paper.

The concern for wildlife in the communities’ agenda for forest

protection
It is important to clarify that the initiatives of the KBP were not motivated
by the need to protect wild animals but to protect forests, a source from which
 Rajasthan 613

villagers drew their resources.

The KBPs were constituted for forest protection but a conservation mandate in PAs also critically
includes wildlife conservation. What really needs to be assessed is the significance that communities
attach to wildlife conservation in their agendas for forest protection. What remains to be probed
is whether people would be equally enthusiastic about wildlife conservation and under what
circumstances.
In the interaction with the villagers in 1996, they neither displayed any overt hostility towards
wildlife, nor did they seem to attribute much significance to it in their day-to-day existence. This
is most unlike their attitudes to trees, which they are making a very deliberate effort to protect.
Wildlife conservation is indirectly effected through forest protection; however none of the KBPs
have any specific rules pertaining to wildlife management or conservation.
Their value for wildlife is derived more from their religious realm and their basic reverence for
nature. Their attitude towards wildlife is varying. While some people take pride in the fact that their
area is rich in wildlife, some others (like in Kased) consider it to be a menace; inevitably, 3-4 times
a year either their cattle are lifted or their crops raided by the wild animals.
It is true that even today the people narrate in very glowing terms how the wildlife gives character
to their life and their forests (as they did in Chauriakhata). However their concern for wildlife needs
to assessed in the current context of the restrictions that they face on account of the sanctuary and
the increasing incidence of crop raiding and cattle-lifting because of degrading forests and greater
proximity to the wildlife.
There is evidence that in the past the people took specific measures to protect their crops against
wildlife. They patronised members of the hunter tribe of Moghiyas to protect their crops, cattle
and humans from wild animals. According to the descendant of the erstwhile king, some villages
located in close proximity to the sanctuary still continue to patronise Moghiyas. Besides, in the
1920s the people had revolted against the state and had in defiance of the law shot wild animals
to protect themselves, their cattle and their crops. It must also be made clear that even now, just
as before, the people bitterly complain against the FD and say that they are more bothered about
wild animals than about human beings.

Changing livelihood aspirations

A great disincentive for the KBPs is the increasing hardships that the people face in meeting their
livelihood requirements from their present circumstances, and their changing aspirations. There
have been consecutive years of poor rainfall. There already exists an acute shortage of water
and fodder in the region. Adding to their misery are the restrictions imposed on account of the
sanctuary. The villagers are aware that they cannot expand their agricultural activities. Because of
poor breed of cattle and lack of roads, their dairy activities have not been very successful. Since
the FD will not allow electricity in the sanctuary, there can be no industrial employment generated,
which they feel would be the ideal source of employment. In the Nibhera Panchayat, their belief
that there are no alternative livelihood means to be had in the village has been reinforced by the
recent happenings. The SSD motivated the panchayat to introduce fish into their village pond and
then lease out the fishing rights to a contractor. The FD has strongly opposed this move. According
to the DFO, this violates the sanctuary laws and thus the process has been put on
hold.
As compared to earlier, a larger number of younger boys have
left their villages for wage labour in bigger cities. Many people have
in conversation actually expressed their willingness to move out of
the sanctuary if they get a decent rehabilitation package. Arun Jindal
case studies - rajasthan

however contends that if the productivity of the area is enhanced

through effective natural resource management, people are willing to
continue their current livelihood means. In Beherda, he has been able
to work intensively on improving the agricultural systems of the villagers
on an experimental basis. According to him, after such improvement the
villagers are unwilling to consider moving out of the area in search of
any other means of employment.

Constraints faced
A comparison of the field studies conducted in 1996 and 2000 reveals that
earlier the villagers were extremely proud and happy about their KBPs. With the attention that they
614 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

received because of the IIPA team and SSD, they were enthusiastic and hopeful that their efforts
would bear fruit and that their immediate livelihood concerns would be resolved. Of course, earlier
too the people spoke of disappointments and disillusionment vis-a-vis the FD and the restrictions
imposed on them on account of the sanctuary. In 2000 the KBPs continue to operate in the area but
the spark and the zeal that they displayed seems to have faded. Today the people do acknowledge
that the communities’ hold and the strictness with which they implemented forest-use regulations
are on the decline; in Ganpath’s words, ‘Woh pehli wali baat nahi rahi’ (things are not the same as
before).
In many places the meetings are no longer summoned as frequently as they used to be. In some
places like Nibhera they have not had an exclusive meeting of the KBP in a long while because
matters are usually discussed in the SHG or VDC meetings. In a long time no one within the village
has been fined. They have been dealt with very lightly. The apex bodies are less and less referred
to. Most importantly, there are those within the village who, if given a choice, would be willing to
abandon the KBP.
However to assess this as a decline in success of the community-initiative would be unfair. It is
not the lack of efforts on the part of the community but the nature of intervention by the FD, the
drought conditions and the demands of the changing social climate that are responsible for the
despondency displayed by the KBPs. We give below some of the critical issues that have affected
the status of conservation initiatives in the area.

Lack of empowerment
As explained earlier, despite the presence of KBPs in this area for so long, none of the villagers’
aspirations for the FD’s support have been realised in practice. Whatever limited support has been
extended through the Eco-development Project has been enjoyed by the EDCs and not the KBPs.
However, since most people have not really been able to grasp the exact nature and purpose of
EDCs, they rarely use the forum to appeal to the FD. Besides, on many occasions when they have
tried to reach the FD they have mostly met with disappointment. Thus the KBPs continue to feel
the lack of empowerment to check violations and to act against offenders. They are more in need
of such empowerment than before as the people, given the drought conditions, become more
desperate and audacious.

Desperate drought conditions

This area being a drought prone-area, droughts are a frequent phenomenon. During such periods
there is an acute shortage of water and fodder and thus economic conditions are badly hit. Under
such circumstances the people feel compelled to extract more fodder resources through the cutting
of trees. After a three-year-long drought between 1997 and 2000, in many villages people explained
that since everyone was cutting the trees no one had the moral authority to check the others
(as mentioned earlier, Lakhruki was an exception in this case). Beside they said it would have
been futile trying to check anyone because it was a matter of life and death so far as their cattle
population was concerned. They however ceased cutting soon after the monsoons commenced.

Loss of sense of ownership and responsibility

The intervention of the EDCs has in some sense resulted in the ‘tragedy of the commons’, insofar
as the function and responsibilities of the KBPs are concerned. In most places villagers explained
that the presence of the EDC has had both a negative and a positive impact. On one hand, people
are more cautious about breaking the rules because the FD is involved. On the other, people feel
that it is now the responsibility of the FD to protect the forests and thus no longer consider it their
sole responsibility.
The loss of responsibility is also connected to the loss of sense of ownership. The FD has been
constantly asserting that it is their responsibility to ensure that the forests are not cut. In the
few meetings of the FD with the EDC, the incentives are literally auctioned against the people’s
assurance that they will not take axes into the forests. Besides, the FD is extremely strict about
letting people use the resources. By these means, the FD has very subtly been asserting a sense of
proprietorship. All this has generated an extreme feeling of loss of ownership and belongingness. As
a result people’s urge to protect the forests has been receding. It should be noted that the people
adopt a very different attitude when protecting their own resources and when protecting resources
that belong to the FD. In Lakhruki the people have been voluntarily protecting the enclosure that
the people had made without any external monetary help. However they are unwilling to protect
 Rajasthan 615

the enclosure made by the FD under the Ecodevelopment Project without any incentive. They feel
that the enclosure is the property of the FD and without any incentive they are unwilling to expend
their time and energy on the same.

Destabilising through EDC intervention

According to the Director of SSD, Arun Jindal, the FD, to serve its own purposes, appropriated
and took advantage of a system (the existing KBPs) that was already in place. In the process of
implementing the project, by generating a sense of loss of ownership and fuelling party politics
it destabilised the fundamentals of the existing system. This seems to have contributed to the
current demoralisation of KBPs in some places. In this context he cites the example of Raher. He
says that at the start the FD took great trouble to reorganise their unsteady KBP into a VSS, which
was soon after referred to as an EDC. Despite several charges of corruption, people continued to
work with the FD for three years through the period of the Ecodevelopment Project. Apparently,
after the termination of the timeframe of the project, the FD has been indifferent to complaints by
the people that there is indiscriminate felling in that area. They have also been equally indifferent
to the complaints about malpractice by the lower-rank FD officials (it should be noted that this is
the same place where at the initial stage the FD had transferred two forest guards on allegations
by the people). From the visit to the village it was clear that the operation of the EDC had definitely
managed to sow seeds of dissension within the community. There were those who were vehemently
opposed to the adhyaksh and accused him of corruption and being an accomplice of the forester,
and there were those who favoured the adhyaksh. Currently, there are some groups indulging in
indiscriminate felling, but with the failing attention of the FD the rest of the community is unable
to stop them from doing it.

The threat of relocation

The threat of relocation has been enhanced by the operations of the EDC. In almost all villages
there are doubts abounding about the sudden flurry of activities that the FD has undertaken in
the past several years. Bhanta of Nibhera clarifies that the people are not sure why the FD has all
of a sudden started making tanks and fodder enclosures, and the suspicion is furthered because
of the increasing strictness about imposing the rules. People feel that these are all endeavours
towards relocation. In Maramda too, similar questions regarding relocation and EDCs were posed.
The general belief is that through the works of the EDC, the FD is actually improving the habitat
for wildlife conservation and once the project is over they will start to remove the people from
the sanctuary. The fact that the FD is vehement about not allowing the laying of electricity lines
and roads convinces them further that they are to be relocated. These threats have affected their
zest for protecting the forests. They believe that their efforts may be futile in the event of being
relocated from the sanctuary.

The issue of ‘benefit sharing’

The issue of whether or not they are allowed to use the resources of the area they protect is a
critical matter affecting the people’s initiative. In Lakhruki there is evidently a loss of morale because
the FD has become increasingly strict about letting them harvest fuelwood, fodder and timber from
the forests that their KBPs have so far been protecting. It has also lately stopped them from getting
stone slabs for building purposes into the sanctuary. The people in Lakhruki state that this is one of
the reasons why the people are less inclined to adhere to the community norms of KBP. Apparently,
while they earlier had considerable influence over the KBPs of the neighbouring villages and in some
ways were responsible for their effective functioning, today their endeavours are confined to their
case studies - rajasthan

own village. The primary reasons for this is that the other villages are demoralised and less willing to
be governed by social sanctions because they feel that their efforts will reap no benefits.

Conclusion
The picture is not entirely dismal. What really needs to be appreciated in this context
is that despite all odds the community efforts at protecting their forests continue.
While some older institutions seem less solid, there are those that are functioning
with great enthusiasm. There is information that in a village called Meldhankri, the
KBPs have been functioning effectively and have been convening their meetings very
regularly. There are a couple of lessons that one may take from this case. First,
community-initiated conservation efforts are dynamic processes. Thus the success
616 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

or failures of such attempts cannot be analysed as one that is fixed in time and thus unchanging.
More realistically they need to be analysed and appreciated in the context of the broad changes in
the policies, practices and social climate that have a direct bearing on them.
Second, community-initiatives at conservation of forests may have very different implications
in PAs than in non-PAs. The two issues that make a critical difference are those of benefit-sharing
and wildlife conservation. This difference needs to be appreciated.
Third, the changing livelihood aspirations of communities inside a PA are a reality that can hardly
be denied. Their initiatives towards conservation are closely connected to the issue of livelihood.
This is a reality that needs to be taken into account when promoting the case of community-based
conservation in a PA. It is quite possible that their aspirations may no longer be compatible with
conservation imperatives.
Fourth—an extension of the first point—efforts made by either the state or other organisations,
apparently to strengthen communities’ efforts, may instead dilute and weaken them. Such
interventions may lead communities to lose the sense of ownership, self-reliance and authority
with which they administer their self -initiated efforts at conservation. Thus, instead of reinforcing
the protective measures, it may lead to a point where the resources that are being protected
become no one’s responsibility and thus vulnerable to exploitation by all.
The fifth and final point is that community-based conservation can be sustained if allowed to be
run on principles of utilitarian conservation and not protectionist conservation.

This case study has been contributed by Priya Das. It is based on primary fieldwork conducted in
1996-97 for the Indian Institute of Public Administration, Delhi, and again between September
2000 and January 2001 for a doctoral thesis. Priya is currently an independent researcher
based in Shimla.

For more details contact:

Arun Jindal
Society for Sustainable Development
Shah Inayat Khirkiya
Karauli 322 241
Rajasthan
Ph: 07464-250288 (O); 221065 (R); 09414689689 (M)
E-mail: socsd@sancharnet.in

Endnotes
1
W.A. Rodgers and H.S. Panwar, Planning a Wildlife Protected Area Network in India. Volume 2. (Dehra Dun, Wildlife
Institute of India, 1988).
2
Hunting reserves maintained by the local rulers for their own hunting pleasure. Local people were not allowed any
use from these reserves.
3
R.K. Tyagi and L. Singh, Kailadevi Vanya Jeev Abhyaran Mai Jaiv Vividhita hetu Kulhadi Bandh Panchayatain:
Sanrakshit Shetra Prabandhan ki Ek Nai Disha, Paper presented at the Symposium on Habitat Conservation - Fresh
Vision in 2000 and Beyond, held at the Ranthambore Tiger Reserve, Sawai Madhopur on 1 and 2 October, 2000.
4
The terrain is rich in shale, sandstone and limestone.
5
R.K. Tyagi and L. Singh, Kailadevi Vanya Jeev Abhyaran. (As above).
6
(As above).
7
Under which a panchayat (consisting of representatives from one or more villages) is the smallest unit of local
administration.
8
In addition to the formal panchayat, most villages in India have an informal traditional panchayat at the hamlet or
individual village level. In reality these are the first decision-making bodies in the village.
 CCA/Raj/CS4/Karauli/Ledhor Kala/Forest protection

Ledhor Kala, Karauli

Background
Ledhor-Kala is located in Karauli district of Rajasthan. The forests in the area are dry deciduous
forests and grasslands. Besides natural forests, the State Forest Department has carried out five
different plantations in the vicinity of the village. The major flora species found here include sheesam,
babul, daru halad, khair, raimji, dhok, safed khair, neem, berberi, chaukar. Older generations in
the village report presence of tigers which are not found any more. The village population is 2000
with 120 households. The villagers are Hindus, and the major castes are rajputs, brahmins, gujjars
and jatavs. Their main source of livelihood is farming and cattle grazing. The cattle population
comprises 1500 cows and buffaloes and 2000 goats. Some of the villagers derive additional income
by way of land revenue. The villagers depend on the forest resources for
their daily requirements such as fodder for cattle, fuelwood and daav
(grass used for making ropes).

Towards community conservation

Till the 1960s this area had lush green forests but as time passed the forests in the area degraded
to the extent that at one point the land became barren. This noticeable change caught the attention
of Bhagwan Singh in 1984. Bhagwan Singh had recently retired from the army and returned to his
village. He organised a meeting with the villagers to discuss the importance of the forests in their
lives. As an outcome of that discussion, the villagers decided to protect the forests in their vicinity.
In 1988 the villagers and the forest department [FD] came together to rejuvenate 375 ha of
forests. The local community started protecting the forests by creating VSSs (van suraksha samiti)
or FPCs (Forest Protection Committee) under the leadership of Singh. The VSS consists of villagers
from all the caste groups. Besides protection of the village forests, five different plantations were
set up out by the FD under Sanza Van Pariyojana (Social Forestry Scheme); this has helped the
forests to regenerate by reducing the pressure on them.
The land was occupied illegally before the conservation initiative took place. In order to regain
control of the land, villagers collected Rs 100,000 to fight a case against the illegal occupants.
Subsequently the land was demarcated and land records were procured. Villagers claim that they
received all the support from the government agencies in trying to protect their forests.
Considering the lack of effective participation by women in the VSS, a MMD (mahila mangal dal)
was formed to encourage women participation. The VSS realized that resource collection is mainly
carried out by women, and if use by women is to be regulated, then their participation in the
initiative is essential. Before the protection efforts the forests were also being used by the women
from the neighbouring villages. The villagers have had clashes with these women in trying to stop
them.1 The villagers have made a written request to the nearby villages for not felling green trees.
They have installed a camera in the forests that has created fear amongst these women.
The management of funds is done by the koshadhyaksh (treasurer), while the local Forest Officer
looks into the accounts for the same. The villagers have planned out the resource utilization of
case studies - rajasthan

the forests in such a way that it does not create pressure on a particular patch. They had allotted
a different forest patch for cattle grazing while doing the plantation for 100 hectares. After three
years the patch under protection is allowed for fodder collection and grazing, and those under use
till then are protected. As part of the protection system the VSS has laid down a set of rules as
follows:
• Grazing permitted only in certain patches of the forest
• Regulated cutting of grass for fodder and for rope making
• Collection of dry wood twice or thrice a month by the villagers
• Cutting of wood as per personal requirement but not for sale
• Ban on felling of green trees
617
618 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

The offenders have to pay a fine of Rs 1100 and those assisting in the offence have to pay Rs
2200.
It seems that all sections of the society are taking part in the protection efforts and the village has
managed to receive support from government agencies too. For example, in case the village faces
problems with the offenders (particularly outsiders), the Police Department also comes forward to
help. It also appears that all sections of the society are equally benefited from the protected areas.
The forest department or MMD act as the conflict resolution bodies.

Impacts of community conservation

Due to the protection of the forests, local people claim to have gained in terms of increased
availability of fuelwood and fodder and also increased agricultural production because of increased
availability of water. Animal husbandry, which was once impossible, has become a profitable
occupation because of increased availability of fodder.
The ecosystem seems to have also benefited with species once rare such as shisham reappearing.
Some animals like leopard, nilgai, black-naped hare and sarus cranes have also made a
comeback.

Opportunities and constraints

The VSS, though constituted many years ago, remains an unregistered body. This denies the VSS
a legal right to apprehend the guilty. This sometimes causes serious problems for the committee
in trying to control the offences.
Initiation of this effort has also caused conflicts with the neighbouring villages because of trying
to stop outsiders from entering the forests for resource use.
Since the regeneration of forests, the population of nilgai has increased, causing damage to the
crops in the village. Villagers are taking up some measures such as shooing the animals away, but
for many it remains an issue that needs to be resolved.

Conclusion
This case study reflects the community initiative that had manifested into effective protection
efforts. However there seems to be a strong need for legal backing for the initiative to enable the
people to assert their rights and responsibilities. Crop damage is another issue that is troubling the
people and needs to be resolved at the earliest.

This case study has been contributed in 2001 by Arun Jindal, Society for Sustainable
Development, Karauli, Rajasthan.

For more details contact:

Bhagwan Singh,
Chair of Forest Protection Committee
Village Ladhor-Kala
Karauli, Rajasthan

Arun Jindal
Society for Sustainable Development
Shah Inayat Khirkiya, Karauli 322 241
Rajasthan
Ph: 07464-250288 (O); 221065 (R); 09414689689 (M)
E-mail: socsd@sancharnet.in

Endnotes
1
Editor’s note: The impact of this initiative on the women who were earlier using the forests is not clear. It appears
from the case study that no alternative was provided to the women.
 CCA/Raj/CS5/Karauli/Patari dang/Forest protection

Patari dang, Karauli

Background
Patari dang (hill) is located near the village of Alampur in Karauli district of Rajasthan. The hill
supports dry deciduous thorn forests and savanna grasslands. Among the medicinal plants found
here are, cheela, gular, bansora, guggal, and gurjain. The fauna found here include leopards,
Indian wolf and striped hyena. Earlier accounts of local people indicate abundance of tigers, which
are now very rarely seen. The forest protection initiative covers an area of approximately 66 ha.
The village population is about 14000 (according to the 1991 census) and the villagers are Hindus
by religion. This society has a caste-based structure, with the main castes being gujjars, thakurs,
kahars and brahmins. The main occupation of the people is agriculture, with the main crops being
bajra (pearl millet), sarson (mustard), wheat and chana. The villagers have about 20000 heads
of livestock, including 8000 goats, 6000 cows, 2000 sheep, 4000 buffaloes and around 600–700
camels. The villagers depend on the forest resources for fuelwood and fodder, and also use the
area for grazing purposes.

Towards community conservation

This area was under a local princely state before Independence. The villagers therefore have
traditional rights over these forests granted to them by the local rulers. The forests were depleted
very rapidly soon after Independence, once the princely state was amalgamated into India. One
of the major causes for forest degradation was the absence of a system for forest protection. In
recent times the forests have been further degraded because of a number of reasons, including
encroachments by nomadic pastoralists; illegal mining; illegal tree felling; increased numbers of
goats and sheep in the surrounding villages and their use of the forests; and even influx of camel
grazers from western Rajasthan. Degradation of forests have meant scarcity of resources as well
as depleted groundwater table for the villagers. In 1984, a retired havaldar (army sergeant),
called Kartar Singh, after returning back to his village, realised the condition of the forest and
made the villagers aware of the forest situation and the importance of conservation, thereby
starting the initiative.
Subsequently, this area was brought under the Joint Forest Management (JFM) programme of the
state government. Under this scheme, a van suraksha samiti (VSS) and mahila mangal dal (MMD)
were constituted for the protection, management and administration of the forest area. Under this
programme the villagers got a certain amount of support from the forest department (FD).
Under JFM, 14 villages in the vicinity of this forest have been included in the protection effort:
these include Alampur, Umri, Nevla, Bhauwa, Lakhmipur, Kanchanpur, Talhati, Chaubar Pura,
Barbat Pura, Sardar Pura, Kedhan Ka Pura and Parsaa Ka Pura. Each VSS consists of 11 members,
of which 8 are men and 3 are women. These members are elected from all the villages. The MMD
consists of seven representatives from each of the villages. There is no system for handling of funds
and maintaining accounts; however, the revenue that is generated by way of fines is deposited in
the village fund. All the villages share equally in the functioning and the decision-making of the
case studies - rajasthan

VSS and the MMD. The meetings of the VSS are held as and when required.
Although these institutions are new, the rules, regulations and resource sharing patterns are
traditional. Some of the rules and rights allowed to the villagers are:
• Right to collect fodder and fuelwood.
• Right to collect palash leaves once a year and loom leaves for fodder once in a year.
• Ban on green tree cutting. In case of an offence, a fine of Rs 500 is imposed on the offender.
• Ban on grazing by camels; offenders have to pay Rs 1100 per camel.
• Collection of firewood by tractors is also banned; offenders are fined Rs 2100 per tractor.

619
620 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

In order to ensure that all rules are being abided by, the VSS installed a camera in the forest.
This ensured that people regulated use of the forest.

Impacts of community conservation

The conserving community depends on the surrounding forests for grazing, collection of fuelwood
and fodder, etc.; they are dependent on the area for their livelihood. The conservation initiative
has ensured easy availability of resources such as fodder, fuelwood and leaf litter for agriculture
and gardens. Additionally, it has believed to have increased the water level in the wells by 10-15
feet, which in turn has increased agricultural productivity. The ecosystem has also regenerated,
although in the absence of any assessment it is difficult to say what has been the impact on the
wild flora and fauna.

Opportunities and constraints

From the case study it appears that the VSS does not have enough funds even to fight cases.
These regenerating forests face continuous external threats and are severely constrained by funds
and lack of effective support from the forest department in being able to fight these. One of the
pressures is from the nomadic camel herdsmen from western Rajasthan, who bring their camels
for grazing in the conserved area.1 These herdsmen do not follow VSS rules and regulations and
often bribe the FD guard on duty to get access to cutting a green tree for fodder. There have been
violent clashes between the villagers and the nomads. Villagers claim that such situations could be
averted if the FD would intervene and cooperate.
These forests are also continuously threatened by the illegal mining taking place in the area,
which the villagers feel can also be stopped with the FD’s intervention. The villagers have not
received required cooperation from FD in either of the above-mentioned cases. The villagers are
financially constrained to take any legal action against these powerful outside offenders on their
own.

Conclusion
This case study reflects a strong initiative by the villagers towards forest protection along
with moderate support from the FD. But despite the existence of institutions for regulating and
implementing protection, there are instances of violations that are beyond their scope. There
seems to be a need for a stronger work orientation between the FD and the villages towards
conservation that can alter the rate of forest regeneration for a longer period of time.

This case study has been contributed by Arun Jindal, Society for Sustainable Development,
Karauli, Rajasthan in 2001.

For more details contact:

Kartar Singh (Retd. Havildar)
Alampur, Dist. Karauli,
Rajasthan

Arun Jindal
Society for Sustainable Development
Shah Inayat Khirkiya
Karauli 322 241
Rajasthan
Ph: 07464-250288 (O); 221065 (R)
Mob: 09414689689
E-mail: socsd@sancharnet.in
Endnotes
1
Editor’s note: It is not clear from the case study whether these are traditional pastoralist communities and what
their traditional interaction with these forests and the local people was.
 CCA/Raj/CS6/Kota/Udupuria village/Heronry

Udupuria village pond, Kota

Background
Udpuria village pond is situated about 28 km
from Kota town of Rajasthan. The village can be
approached on Kota–Shyopur road and is 7 kms
from Digodh town and 10 km from the Chambal
river. The pond covers an area of about 2 ha. The
pond is predominantly rain-fed but is also connected
to the Right Main Canal of the Chambal river and
receives water from it in the summers when the
canal is operating.
The villagers belong to the brahmin, meena,
berwa, bawari and nandwana communities and all
villagers are completely vegetarian.
The pond is nowadays well-known as a breeding
ground for painted storks. According to the villagers
Udupuria village pond Photo: Anil Nair
these birds have been coming here since 1994. The
site was first discovered by two bird watchers, Anil Nair and Akilesh Begri, during the winter birds
survey in January 1997. According to the counts in January 1997, the number of young and adult
birds was 250.
In addition to painted storks, other birds found in the area include the lesser whistling teal,
common coot, purple moorhen, common moorhen, white-breasted waterhen, cotton teal, northern
pintail, northern shoveller, Eurasian wigeon, spotbilled duck, red-wattled lapwing, black-winged
stilt, white-breasted kingfisher, black ibis, stone curlew, Indian peafowl and black-necked stork.
Babul, tamarind, banyan, peepal and neem are some of the tree species found here.

Towards community conservation

In 1997, when the bird-watchers found the pond, it had a small patch of water hyacinth. In
subsequent years 90 percent of the pond was covered by the hyacinth. In 1998, 29 pairs made
nests here, but as the pond was largely covered with hyacinth only 7 pairs raised their families
here while the rest left the site.
In the summer of 1999 a local NGO (Hadothi Naturalists Society) along with the villagers took up
the task of manually removing the hyacinth. The members of the NGO explained to the villagers
about cleaning the pond and the reasons for this. A few villagers agreed to join the cleaning drive,
as they were also facing problems while bathing, washing clothes and accessing water for cattle
due to the spread of the hyacinth. When the manual removal of hyacinth began, all the villagers
joined the drive and some even brought their tractors to help remove the hyacinth. Subsequently,
the villagers have started helping in saving the chicks or juveniles from dogs and other predators
case studies - rajasthan

when they fall from their nests. The local media has extensively covered the efforts of the villagers
in cleaning the pond and saving the birds. This has been a great encouragement to the villagers.
The following breeding period saw an all-time high of 250 painted storks fighting to find a
suitable place to make nests. Finally 95 nests were made and all the chicks survived. In 2001, a
pair of black-necked storks was also seen looking for a suitable place for nesting, but they were
not successful and left. This pair was seen coming till 2004.
The pond is used by the villagers for their everyday needs; it also helps to maintain the water
table of the wells in the village. In 2004 a plantation drive was carried out by the villagers, the
forest department and local college students opposite the pond to have more trees available for
nesting in the future.

621
622 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Opportunities and constraints

Currently the NGO and the villagers are looking for support is order to establish a chick- rearing
center (with egg hatchery, medicine and food). They also wish to train one of the village youths
during the period of nesting and pay some honorarium/salary to the person for that particular
period. There is also a need to highlight the efforts of the villagers in the national media to raise
their pride in having and saving the breeding colony of the storks.

Conclusion
Various species can be saved by involving the people living around them. This can be achieved
by creating a pride among the people about their efforts at conservation.

This case study has been contributed by Anil K. Nair, an ornithologist, in 2006.

For more information contact:

Anil K. Nair
81, Shopping Center
Kota 324007, Rajasthan
Tel: 0744- 2392063, 09828214901
crane_anil@rediffmail.com

Painted storks at Udupuria Photo: Anil Nair

 CCA/Raj/CS7/Udaipur/Khichan/Species protection

Khichan village, Udaipur

Background
Khichan is one of those villages that have sustained protection since generations. It is located
near Phalodi at a distance of 150 km from Jodhpur in Udaipur district of Rajasthan. In the 19th
century Khichan was famous for being the village of several rich Jain traders, who have now
migrated to other important centres of commerce. Khichan is today famous for another migratory
community that makes its home here for the six months of winter. These are the endangered
demoiselle cranes, who have been coming to Khichan for generations. The numbers of these
birds are dwindling fast elsewhere because of hunting along their migratory route and ecological
imbalances in their natural habitat. These cranes arrive in Khichan in the month of August from
Mongolia and Central Asia to spend the winter here.

Towards community conservation

The villagers have been playing host to these birds since generations. They arrive during the
winter season and stay here for 6 months. Feasts are hosted when they arrive each year. The birds
form an important part of their lives and are treated well. There is a folk song that has a mention
about these birds. The cranes are called kurja by the villagers. Every morning the villagers feed
wheat, jowar (sorghum), bajra (pearl millet) and mateers (watermelon seeds) to the birds. Nearly
500 kg of grain is spread to feed the birds. There is a 200 sq m feeding ground called chugga ghar
where they assemble for their feeds. The birds are comfortable in the village and can be seen on
rooftops, in waterholes and on the surrounding sand dunes.
The villagers are compensated by the annual remittances they receive
from a section of the Oswal Jains, a community that has migrated
out of the village. Funds for the grains also come as donations from
visitors. An account of all the donations received and expenses borne
is kept in the village. These activities are administered by the Kuraj
Sanrakshan Vikas Sansthan, a society established in Khichan for the protection and
care of the cranes. He is a trustee of this charitable trust. Ratan Lal and his wife
have devoted their lives to these cranes. They ensure that the food stock for the
birds is always full.

Impacts of community conservation

According to the villagers, only a few birds used to come to the village earlier; however, since the
villagers have started feeding them a few decades ago, their numbers have increased tremendously.
In 1996, about 6000 birds visited the village.1

Opportunities and constraints

case studies - rajasthan

The major threat to the protection offered to these birds is tourism. In this case there is a need to
probe and analyse the implications in terms of revenue generation for the villagers and the quality
of grain offered to the birds. There have been instances where the villagers warded off two hotel
ventures that were to be built in an area close to the village. The number of visitors in recent times
has gone up to around 10,000 per season.
Visitors can also be a disturbance to the birds when they move to the sand dunes nearby. The
cranes are not usually disturbed by passing camel carts and people. However, if disturbed, a
single alarm call causes the whole flock to take wing. This spectacle fascinates many people, who
then deliberately disturb the birds. An increasing population of dogs and crows is also gradually
becoming a serious disturbance to the birds in the village.
623
624 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

To prevent the birds from getting disturbed while feeding, a separate feeding ground was
established by the villagers. However, the number of birds has now increased to the extent that all
cannot fit here. The villagers are currently considering ways of dealing with this.
New settlers encroaching upon previously open government land and building houses is now
hampering the preferred flight path of the birds. This has created tension in the village between
those conservationists in the village who want to assure the safety and peace of the cranes and
opposition politicians who see the new settlers as potential vote banks. Local authorities have
sometimes tried to evacuate the encroachers; however they have not been very successful because
of political patronage.

Feeding time for demoiselle cranes Photo: Asad Rahmani

Conclusion
This case study reflects effective protection towards the avian visitors that are under threat in
other areas that are part of their migratory route. The aspect that is most apparent is that the
villagers have successfully been offering protection on their own initiative. Not everyone in the
village unanimously supports the crane-feeding programme. There are some who are concerned
about the increasing population of pigeons and other birds because of this free feeding. However,
most people are enthusiastic about their care for the cranes. They defend their position by saying
that more and more of the traditional grounds of the cranes are now either destroyed or threatened
and that they are proud that Khichan is one of the safe havens for these special visitors.

This case study has been compiled based on information provided by Rauf Hameed from
Pakistan, Lian Chawaii from Delhi and Amit Shankar from Rajasthan in the write-up ‘Flight
into danger’, published in Down to Earth, January 2001, and by Rakesh Bhandari in his article,
‘They strive to protect cranes in this village’ published in Times Of India, 23 October 1998. See
also O. Pfister, OBC Bulletin, 24 December 1996.

For more details contact:

Ratan Lal
Kuraj Sanrakshan Vikas Sanstha
Khichan village
Near Phaodi
Udaipur District
Rajasthan

Endnotes
1
O. Pfister, OBC Bulletin, 24 December 1996.
 CCA/Raj/CS8/Udaipur/Suali/Forest protection

Suali village, Udaipur

Background
Suali village is located in Udaipur district of Rajasthan. It is one of the hamlets located to the
east of Bhamti revenue village. The Bhamti revenue village consists of Suali, Bhamti and Unali
Bor hamlets. The protected area, known locally as kakrot ka jungle, lies to the east of Suali. The
total area under conservation is undulating and covers about 500 ha. These forests are under the
jurisdiction of the forest department. The forests of Kwadar, Bawai, Samlai and Panwa villages lie
to the east of kakrot ka jungle.
The Suali settlement was set up 60-70 years ago by clearing dense forests. Today the village
consists of 572 people. The local people belong to the Bhil clan; the major communities are
Kharadis, Sevanas, Vadheras and Khokarias. The main occupations of the villagers are agriculture
and cattle grazing. The local villagers as well as the neighboring villages depend on the forest
resources for their needs such as fuelwood, timber and fodder.

Towards community conservation

Till around the time of Independence, this area had a dense forest cover. Subsequently as
population in surrounding villages kept increasing and pressure on the surrounding forests of
Karel, Neechli Seegri and Upalri Seegri led to the degradation of these forests, the pressure on
kakrot ka jungle started mounting. As these tribal communities practiced shifting cultivation, once
they occupied these forests their degradation was quick. Gradually, the Suali settlement began to
expand and more and more cultivable forest land came under occupation for agriculture. In 1985,
the deteriorating condition of these forests was brought to the notice of the entire village by a
few villagers, namely, Bhimji, Velnathji, Hajaji, Vadhera and Mangal Nathji. After some discussion
the villagers decided to discontinue the practice of shifting cultivation. In further discussions the
villagers realized that steps would have to be taken to improve the quality of forests. In 1985 a
Forest Protection Committee (FPC) was constituted by the village. They formally conveyed to the
neighbouring villages that they had resolved to protect the forests. A set of rules and regulations
were put in place for effective protection, including:
• Ban on felling of green trees
• Ban on grazing in July and August to facilitate plant regeneration
• No felling without permission
• No permission to be granted for felling fruit-bearing trees
• Collection of dry twigs and branches only
• Ban on carrying an axe into the forest without permission
• In addition to the local villagers, the neighbouring villagers are allowed to collect dry twigs and
dead wood, and graze cattle.
case studies - rajasthan

For offences, if someone is found carrying axe into the forest without permission, the penalty
includes confiscation of the axe and a fine of Rs 5. For cutting wood without permission a fine of
Rs 25 is charged.
The FPC consists of 11 members, including two women members. Villagers claim that all villagers
participate in protection activities, including women. The men take informal help from the women
on certain management and protection issues. Most of the expenses for protection activities are
borne by the villagers.
Villagers follow two systems for protection:
a) Patrolling of forests in groups
b) Declaring the protected patch as sacred
625
626 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

In the initial years the villagers from 2-3 households would together patrol the forest on a
rotational basis to protect it from illicit felling and forest fires. However, they were helpless
against the neighbouring villagers, who would come in groups of 10-15 persons. The villagers then
decided to undertake surprise patrol visits in large numbers. Despite all measures, illicit tree felling
continued. This compelled the villagers to declare this area as a sacred site. On 6 Sept 1995 they
sprinkled the trees with kesar (saffron) and vowed that they would not cut a single tree for the
next seven years.
Due to the protection efforts taken up by the people, there have been many clashes with the
neighbouring villagers. The Suali villagers were denied access to the access road and sometimes
even physically abused. The villagers then registered a complaint with the local forester, who
then filed a case against the villagers of Neechli Seegri who had attacked the villagers. However a
settlement was reached between the two villages.
The village has been supported strongly in its protection efforts by the Communist Party of
India (CPI). Seva Mandir, a local NGO has also helped the villagers spread awareness among the
villagers.

Impacts of community conservation

There are visible signs of regeneration of forests. Over the years soil erosion has decreased and
a few local species of trees such as teak and dhawada have regenerated well. There is an optimal
use of the forest resources by the villagers. The amount of litter has increased, although grass
production has reduced. There is an overall enrichment of the nutrient status in the area.

Opportunities and constraints

Despite all the protection measures, there have been incidents of sporadic felling of trees. The
villagers have given up their traditional practices to protect the forests. The entire system of
protection is based on social fencing.

Conclusion
From this case study it is apparent that forest protection is totally centred around the villagers
initiative. In order to sustain it for a long time, there needs to be some form of support from the
forest department that would facilitate the process. Steps should also be taken by the villagers to
increase grass production, which would serve the purpose of grazing.

This case study has been compiled based on information provided by Neeraj Kumar Negi in his
article ‘What makes people protect forest,’ Wastelands News, xvi, 2 (Nov.00 - Jan.01), p.27-
32.
Sikkim
Community conservation in the Sikkim Himalaya
Nandita Jain
(with additional inputs by Nakul Chettri, Usha Lachungpa and Lalit Rai)

1. Background
1.1. Geographic profile
Sikkim, which became part of the Indian Union in 1975 is a vertical strip of very rugged,
mountainous country, having a geographical area of 7096sq.km. It is bounded by the Chola ridge
towards the east, the Singhalila ridge towards the west and the mighty Himalayan axis in the
north. These ranges enclose Sikkim in a titanic horseshoe, which traps the moisture-laden winds
from the Bay of Bengal, causing heavy precipitation. This land is drained by the mighty Teesta
and Rangit rivers, which flow from north to south. The most astonishing aspect of this region is
the enormous altitudinal gradient, ranging from 300 masl (metres above sea level) to 8585 masl.
This creates a range of climatic zones, right from the tropics to the tundra. This in turn fosters a
bewildering diversity of flora and fauna.1
Sikkim extends approximately 114 km from north
to south and 64 km from east to west, surrounded
by vast stretches of Tibetan Plateau in the north,
the Chumbi valley of Tibet and the kingdom of
Bhutan in the east, the Darjeeling Gorkha Hill
Council of West Bengal in the south and Nepal
in the west. The state, being a part of the inner
ranges of the Himalayas, has no open valley and
no plains but varied elevations ranging from 300
to 8585 masl, consisting of lower hills, middle and
higher hills, alpine zones and snow-bound land,
the highest elevation of 8585 m being the top of
the Khangchendzonga mass itself. Khangchendzonga, the country’s highest
ecosystem Photo: Sandeep Tambe

1.2. Climatic profile

Annual rainfall varies from 1300 mm at its lowest elevation to over 4000 mm at elevations around
2000m, with 60–75 per cent of rain falling during the period June-August. The mean temperature
in the lower altitudinal zones varies from 4.5ºC to 18.5ºC, whereas at higher altitudinal zones, it
varies from 1.5ºC to 9.5ºC. The temperature varies with altitude and slope.

1.3. Ecological profile

Estimates of land use indicate that about 43 per cent of the state’s total land area is under forest
cover, and about 11 per cent under agriculture. Approximately 28 per cent of the area is under
perpetual snow cover, and 14 per cent is under alpine pastures. Alpine areas are famous for the
occurrence of numerous medicinal plants.2
state chapter - sikkim

Champion and Seth3 demarcated six broad vegetation types in Sikkim:

1. Tropical Semi- Evergreen Forest (300–900 m)
2. Sub-Tropical Mixed Broad Leaved Hill Forest (900–1800 m)
3. Himalayan Wet Temperate Forest (1800–2700 m)
4. Sub-Alpine Forest (2700–3700 m)
5. Moist Alpine Forest (3700–4000 m)
6. Dry Alpine Forests (4000 m)
629
630 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Table 1: Biological and Ecological Diversity of Sikkim

Component Approximate numbers

Flowering Plants 4500 spp.
Orchids 500 + spp.
Rhododendrons 36 spp.
Bamboos 20 spp.
Ferns and Ferns allies 362 spp.
Tree Ferns 9 spp.
Primulas 30 spp.
Oaks 11 spp.
Mammals 144 spp.
Birds 550 spp.
Butterflies 600 + spp.
Fishes 48 spp.

Physical Features
Mountains and Peaks 28
Glaciers 21
Lakes and Wetlands 227
Rivers and Streams >104

Table 2: Protected Areas in Sikkim

Name Remarks Area (sq.km)

Established 1977 (BR) Established
Khangchendzonga Biosphere 2000 (NP) 2,655 of which
Reserve (including the
Kangchendzonga National Park) Covers temperate and Alpine 1,784 is the NP
types
South-west Sikkim, sub-Alpine
Barsay Rhododendron Sanctuary forest adjacent to Singhalila 104
National Park in Darjeeling
Sub-tropical and temperate
Fambong Lho Wildlife Sanctuary forest types close to state capital 52
Gangtok
Yumthang Valley in Lachung
Singbha Rhododendron Sanctuary area in North Sikkim, sub-Alpine 43
rhododendron forest
Temperate and Sub-Alpine forest
Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary 35
in South Sikkim
Kyongnosla Alpine Sanctuary Sub-Alpine and Alpine types 31
Temperate and Sub-alpine forest
Pangolakha Wildlife Sanctuary 124
in South-east Sikkim

1.4. Socio-economic profile

Sikkim is a multi-ethnic state broadly divided into tribal and non-tribal groups. Lepchas, Bhutias
and Sherpas are some of the major tribes. The Lepchas are considered the original inhabitants of
the state and, compared to other ethnic groups, still maintain many of their traditions. The Bhutias
are originally from Tibet. The Sherpas are a marginal ethnic group in the state. Over 70 per cent
of the population consists of Nepalese, who are today the dominant ethnic group in the state. The
people from the plains, mostly involved in trade and services, represent another marginal group.
 Sikkim 631

Sikkim’s population has gone up from 316,385 in 1981 to 540,851 in 2001. Of this population,
111,405 (or about 21 per cent) are scheduled tribes. The sex ratio is 875. Sikkim has a long
tradition of Buddhism, although only 25 per cent of the population practices Buddhism. Though a
majority of the population is Hindu, Buddhist traditions remain deeply ingrained in the psyche of
the Sikkimese people. This is evident in all walks of life, including architecture and a large number
of monasteries and stupas dotting the landscape.
Buddhism was introduced into Sikkim after the consecration of the first chogyal (religious king)
of Sikkim at Norbugang, Yuksam in 1642. This is also when the first Buddhist monastery was
established at Dubdi near Yuksam. Buddhism was the state religion here until Sikkim became a
part of India in 1975.4
The economy of Sikkim is mainly based on agriculture and animal husbandry. Approximately
11 per cent of the total geographical area is under agriculture. Agriculture is of mixed type
and still mostly at a subsistence rather than commercial level. As an important aspect of the
hill economy, where productivity is low, all the able-bodied people (men and women both) are
employed in agriculture or related activities. Cultivators account for 57.84 per cent of people in the
state. Agricultural labourers as a whole constitute only 7.81 per cent of the workers in the state.
Industries are negligible, but the tertiary sector at the state level accounts for a good percentage
of the working population.5
Cardamom cultivation is an important contributor to Sikkim’s economy, and in one form or another
provides both rich and poor farmers a significant source of income. This native mountain cash
crop generally grows beneath natural forest
cover on marginal lands. Significant areas
of cereal-dominated subsistence agriculture
have slowly been transformed into this high-
value cash crop since Sikkim’s merger with
India in 1975. The total area under cardamom
cultivation is estimated to be 20,000 ha.
Almost 1,316 ha of reserved forests in Sikkim
are also being used for under-canopy large
cardamom cultivation. Farmers lease the
land but have no rights to cut the trees.
Generally, cardamom plantations support
surprisingly good tree diversity since the crop
requires shade. The dominant tree species in
cardamom plantations are Alnus and Albizzia
spp., reflecting the elevations and forest
types that are favourable to its growth. The
primary concern, however, is the amount of From yak herding to tourism
wood needed to cure and process the crop.6 Photo: Sandeep Tambe
The past one and a half decades have witnessed a tremendous upward swing in various
developmental programmes, giving a new thrust to the Sikkim economy. This process has increased
wage-employment opportunities. Although most of the inhabitants are still basically in agricultural
occupations, they have diversified into tertiary jobs such as government services. Tourism has
only recently provided economic opportunities. Over 100,000 tourists came to Sikkim in 1999, of
which about 90 per cent were domestic visitors.

1.5. Land use patterns

As mentioned above, forestry is the major land use in the state, with nearly 80 per cent of the
total geographical area of the state under the administrative control of the Forest Department
state chapter - sikkim

(FD). 14.40 per cent of total land area is under permanent pastures and grazing land including
cultivable wastes.7

2. A history of administrative control over land and

resources
2.1. Forestry in Sikkim
The FD is one of the oldest departments in the state, having come into existence in the 1890s.
Close to 80 per cent of the total geographical area is currently under the administrative control of
632 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

this department. In 1902, the then chogyal of Sikkim, Sidkeong Tulku, after getting educated at
Oxford University, initiated a process of demarcating forest areas in his kingdom. Forests that were
considered vital to the functioning of the kingdom were designated as Reserve Forests and set
aside for protection. No logging was permitted in these areas and heavy penalties were imposed
for illegal activities. Khasmal forests were designated around villages and settlements that could
be used for the timber, fodder and fuelwood requirements of the local villagers. Grazing lands or
goucharan were designated as common grazing areas. At the time of demarcation, one family was
permitted to graze one milch animal and a pair of bullocks free of charge in goucharan areas.
Key events in Sikkim’s history of forestry are summarised below:
1893: Forest Department of Sikkim established; Reserved Forests (RF) demarcated; Khasmal
Forests demarcated out of notified RF; Goucharan Forests demarcated; Conservation and
Preservation of Wildlife Game Law formulated
1955: Areas declared as camping grounds for horses/mules
1956: Sikkim Forest Act formulated, same as Indian Forest Act (previously under West Bengal
modification)
1959: Clear-felling permitted after the Chinese aggression
1977: Khangchendzonga National Park established
1978: Separate Directorate for Fisheries and Wildlife created
1980: Directorate of Fisheries and Wildlife bifurcated to separate wings
1983: Four new wildlife sanctuaries established
1988: Sikkim Forest, Water Conservation and Road Reserve (Preservation and Protection) Act
enforced
1989: Indian Forest Act, 1927, extended to include Sikkim
1995: Grazing in Reserve Forests, plantations and perennial water-source catchments in south-
west districts banned
1998: Khangchendzonga National Park boundary extension; Joint Forest Management Resolution
gazetted
2000: Creation of Khangchendzonga Biosphere Reserve
The State’s first Working Plan (1951-71) demarcated Road Reserves and Slip Reserves as state-
owned forests. Other kinds of forests demarcated but not considered under state management
were forests under the kazis,8 gumpa or Monastery Forests, and Private Forests of the chogyal and
members of the royal family. Subsequently, the state took over the management of some of the
Private Forests, particularly those managed by kazis and monastery officials.
Unlike forest management elsewhere in India, forestry in Sikkim has not focused on extractive
practices such as commercial felling. This absence can partly be explained by the remoteness of the
region and the associated difficulties in access and transportation.
Commercial felling has however, become a concern over the
past few years, with incidents of relatively large-scale felling in
north and west Sikkim being reported and debated in the media.
Recently the export of timber, stone and sand has been banned
from north Sikkim.9

2.2. Rights and concessions

Access by local people to forests is primarily determined by
their designation (Khasmal, Goucharan or Reserved). Access to
Reserved Forests (2,261sq.km), determined by the Forest Act, is
very restrictive. Any rights that kazis may have had in Reserved
Forests have been liquidated. Khasmal Forests (281sq.km)
allow the greatest access to local people, who are able to collect
fuelwood, fodder, timber and other non-timber forest products
primarily for subsistence use at no cost. Goucharan Forests
(185sq.km) are primarily for grazing purposes and while people Himal rakshak with the endemic
have the right to free grazing and collection of firewood, no tree Rheum nobile
cutting is permitted. Photo: Sandeep Tambe
 Sikkim 633

In order to extract timber and medicinal plants, permits are required from the FD. The Sikkim
government has not granted any permits to external agencies (such as commercial concerns) to
extract medicinal plants. Under the law there is a collection cycle for medicinal herbs, which is
managed under rotation so that sites are able to recover, but it is not very clear whether this is
actually implemented. Illegal extraction is known to happen but the exact extent is not known.

2.3. The gumpa or monastery forests

Many of the monasteries in Sikkim have their own forests, from which there is some extraction
for religious rituals but not for other uses. Around many of the monasteries in Sikkim, such as
Pemayangtse, Dubdi, Lachung, Ralang, Sangacholing, Phodong, Khecheopalri and so on, are small
areas of forest (often several hectares) that are relatively undisturbed. Most of these monasteries
are set in biodiversity-rich warm and cool temperate forest types and represent a small but
interesting aspect of traditional management of forest resources. Resident monks manage these
areas not only for resources to be used for rituals, but more importantly to maintain a sense of
sanctity and tranquility for residents and visitors alike. It is therefore not that surprising to find
descriptions of monasteries for visitors that highlight the surrounding forest areas as verdant,
tranquil, lush green, etc. Ideally, forests should surround any monastery, but when this is not
possible, as in the case of the new Rumtek monastery (the old one was surrounded by forests), at
least one forested slope is maintained next to the monastery.
Gumpa forests are closely protected by the monks and they generally do not allow local inhabitants
access for fodder, firewood and timber. As monasteries play a very important role in the social and
cultural lives of many Sikkimese people and are highly respected, there is little encroachment into
these forests. As a result, these relatively small Gumpa or monastery forests have remained in
relatively good ecological condition. However, little, if any, work has been done to assess the total
area under this type of management, but their place in local culture remains important regardless
of their extent.

2.4. Conventional conservation practices

Protected Areas (excluding the buffer zone of the Khangchendzonga Biosphere Reserve), created
out of Reserved Forests, cover approximately 28 per cent of the state, an area almost equivalent
to that considered under perpetual snow cover. (With the inclusion of Pangolakha this figure may
change, with the total PA coverage including buffer zone of KNP being 42 per cent of the toal
geographic area) The largest protected area is Khangchendzonga National Park (1784sq.km),
which now forms the core zone of the Biosphere Reserve in West Sikkim. With the creation of the
Biosphere Reserve in 2000, 946sq.km of reserve forest has been added, making the total area
of the reserve 2655sq.km. Other protected areas in Sikkim are wildlife sanctuaries located in all
regions of the state covering a variety of forest types (See Table 2).
Sikkim’s protected areas are governed by the Indian Wildlife Act (1972, amended 2003) and
administered by the Wildlife Wing of the Sikkim Government Department of Forests, Environment
and Wildlife. The most interesting and significant impact of this legislation for communities and
conservation is in Kanchendzonga Biosphere Reserve, specifically in the core area governed by
National Park regulations.
A small settlement of Tibetan refugees was
granted land by the chogyal, as a payment
for looking after his livestock in the area.
About 10 households were given 30 ha of
sub-alpine forest and the settlement of
Tshoka was established. In winter, these
state chapter - sikkim

families move to lower elevations with their

livestock. At the time of creating the National
Park in 1977, this settlement and the lower
pastures did not fall within the boundaries,
but subsequent enlargements have resulted
in the settlement of Tshoka and the winter
pastures falling within the National Park.
Over the years, the families of Tshoka have
used resources outside the original 30 ha.
The size of the settlement has decreased as Sungmoteng Tsho, one of 73 alpine holy lakes in KNP
the younger generation has migrated outside Photo: Sandeep Tambe
634 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

in search of alternative livelihoods. It is not clear what future policy will be followed regarding this
settlement, but it is clear that families do not want to lose title to their lands.
Villagers from Yuksam and other settlements on the periphery of the National Park traditionally
took their animals up to the higher elevations for grazing every summer, and also maintained
yaks at higher elevations. In the late 1990s, the FD attempted to restrict and virtually ban grazing
within the National Park. Not surprisingly, the ban was not well received by local people, and
grazing continues, although it is unclear whether this is permitted or signifies lack of enforcement
by the authorities. As with much of Sikkim, remote areas are not patrolled and in the absence
of active participatory protected area management, people and authorities continue for the most
part as they always did, irrespective of orders and edicts. Similar conditions can be found in other
protected areas, though some efforts have been made to consult with local users (often without
any follow-up, usually due to lack of resources), and other efforts are being taken that encourage
and promote more active participation of people in conservation.10

2.5. Joint forest management

In 1998 the Government of Sikkim issued the notification of an order to establish Forest
Protection Committees. The underlying concern behind the notification was degradation of khasmal
and goucharan Forests. Forest Protection Committees made up of villagers, panchayat and forest
officials would be entitled to 25 per cent of the net income derived from the forest crop (including
non-timber forest products and medicinal plants) that would be protected and left after meeting
the bonafide needs of the local villagers in respect of fodder and firewood from fallen and dry
twigs. In addition, these committees may also be given 25 per cent of the income generated
from the intermediate fellings, i.e., thinning and cleaning, etc. JFM at this point focused solely on
degraded forests. In south and west Sikkim efforts are underway (starting in 2001) to establish
Ecodevelopment and Forest Protection Committees.
As an area of high biodiversity, Sikkim’s forests have many valuable species in terms of both
conservation value and potential human use. Much of the recent writing about JFM and its
implementation highlights the need to move beyond subsistence and into income generation.
In the initial gazetted order, the focus of the FD was on rehabilitation of degraded forest areas,
but most villagers would probably view JFM as an opportunity to deal with issues of decreasing
biomass, meeting daily requirements of forest products and/or a means to increase income. In
regions of high biodiversity and close proximity to protected areas there is an added concern of
the relationship between JFM and biodiversity conservation. If Sikkim adopts JFM practices from
other states without adapting them to its conditions (i.e., with a focus on timber), it may find that
better-off villagers with minimal forest dependence become even wealthier.
NTFP represents an important livelihood strategy for many people, but confusion over rights
provides little benefit for local users and managers, since forest records have not been updated
for many decades. JFM, if implemented fully, also signifies a shift in control not only in decision-
making about forest management but also in access to resources. With growing decentralisation in
administrative and political systems, there will be tensions between conventional decision-makers
(namely, the FD) and newcomers into JFM such as the panchayats. State governments that are
already short of financial resources are likely to view moves that shift financial resources to local
administrative units with some resentment, which could in turn have significant implications for
the way that JFM is formulated and implemented.
To date there has been little in the way of JFM implementation, and there is little to write of in
terms of experiences and impacts on local communities living in and around forest areas. It is,
however, imperative to draw lessons from the implementation of JFM in other parts of the country
before getting fully into JFM in Sikkim.

3. Elements of community conservation

3.1. Sacred landscapes
According to Ramakrishnan,11 for the Sikkimese people the whole
state of Sikkim is sacred. Sometime in the 7th century AD Lord Padma
Sambhava (a great Indian saint) was invited to Tibet by King Trisong
Deutsen to establish and introduce Buddhism. It is believed that on his way
to Tibet, he went via Sikkim and is said to have hidden many treasures or
ters here. Therefore Sikkim is regarded as the holiest of all places and it is said
that one merit done here equals a hundred thousand merits done elsewhere.
 Sikkim 635

Ney-sol, a Buddhist directory of the holy places, describes the area below Mount Khangchendzonga
in West Sikkim (referred to as Demojong), as most sacred and the abode of Sikkim’s deities. This
entire region is also referred to as Yuksam.
Yuksam is considered to be a lhakhang or altar for offerings to the Khangchendzonga deities.
The seven holy lakes surrounding Khangchendzonga—Kheocheopalri, Katok Tso, Bar Cho Marpu,
Phu Cho Karpu, Ka Bur la tso, Sume ten tso and Dafuk yum tso are the seven offering bowls to the
Khangchendzonga deities. The Rathong Chu, a sacred river in Yuksam, is said to have its source in
nine holy lakes located closer to the mountain peaks. The Yuksam region is also considered to have
109 hidden lakes. Every landscape of highland, middle land and low land and every river, stream,
cave, and big tree is believed to have guardian deities (yullha, zibda) of their own, and therefore
during the morning ritual in every monastery these deities are worshiped with great devotion.
According to Shri Sanga Tempa, Head Lama of Dubdi Monastery, Yuksam,12 Khangchendzonga,
the guardian deity of Sikkim is regarded as the premier highland deity of the mountains and it is
surrounded by a hundred to a thousand smaller hills and their deities like Khabur Tsen, Dzongri
Tsan, etc. The four holy caves—Lhari Nying Phu (The Old Cave of God`s Hill) in the north, Khandu
San Phu (Cave of the Occult Fairies) in the south, Bas Phu (Sacred Cave) in the east and De-Chen
Phu (Cave of Great Happiness) in the west surround the great Khangchendzonga.
The midland deities comprise Pao Hungri with 21 major deities and a hundred thousand Tsan
and a hundred thousand Dii, Bar Pin Dheen, deities of Chak Drok Drak, Singe Drak, Bap Churong,
Bakteng Re (Tsan Na), Lanka Bur, etc. The lowland deities comprise of Ka Gye (Eight Protector
Deities) and deities of the important hills like Tashiding, Sanga Choling, Pema Yangtse, Rabdentse,
Pham Rong, Drak Thong Rong, Dorjee Drak and the deities of the 100 species of trees and flowers.
Every hill has its own importance and significance. For example, at a place called Nalung just
before entering Khangchendzonga National Park (KNP), one has to make a vow not to pollute the
land, lakes, rivers and streams and not harm animals and
plants. At a place called Ra Luk Yasha below Bakhim, one
is not allowed to carry meat, especially pork, or to make
noise; one must also abstain from getting intoxicated. All
these deities are the protectors of mountains, lakes, wild
animals, flowers, forests and rivers. Any developmental
work resulting in clearing of forests, blocking of rivers,
dynamiting a place and even its smell is believed to disturb
these local deities, which causes landslides, disease, and
other natural calamities like cyclones, hailstorms, etc.
Given all this, it is not surprising that the Rathong Chu
Hydro-electric project proposed by the government in
1994 was vehemently opposed by the local people. This
opposition was not only restricted to those currently residing
in Yuksam but also locals now educated and settled outside.
Maintaining the sanctity of this entire landscape is seen as
being vital to the well-being of the people and ecosystem
even today. The short-sightedness of the proponents of the
project is evident from the fact that they considered local
people superstitious and under the influence of blind faith
thus opposing the dam, even though the dam would have
opened the door to development in the area. The religious
sentiments are deeply sensitive about the ecological Khangchendzonga, the sacred landscape
Photo: Sandeep Tambe
fragility, a fact yet not understood by many outside of the
Yuksam community. The proposal was finally dropped by the government due to strong mass
opposition.13
state chapter - sikkim

3.1.1. The Kabi sacred grove14

Located at an elevation of 7,000ft with a southern aspect, Kabi sacred grove is a small forest
(6 ha) with historical significance. It is situated near the road that takes travellers from Sikkim’s
capital, Gangtok, to the more remote and rugged northern region of the state. This small area marks
an important juncture in Sikkim’s history. It was in this forested area that the Lepcha and Bhutia
rulers signed a treaty in the 13th century to promote communal harmony and fraternity between
the two communities. A stone marks the place and occasion. All the peripheral villages of Kabi have
reverence for the sacred site and have developed rules that govern the area’s management.
In 1268 Punu Habum was the Lepcha king in Sikkim. Thickem Chek, an enlightened person, was
636 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

his patron. At this time Sikkim was attacked through the Chumbi valley on the eastern border with
Tibet by Khye-Bumsa (the Bhutia ruler). Punu Habum forced an accord with the invader but was
killed by the deceit of Khye-Bumsa. Khye-Bumsa’s claim to be the ruler of Sikkim raised suspicion.
Thickem Chek discovered through tantric practices the nature of the deceit. Khye-Bumsa confessed
and was made to swear that he would follow all Lepcha traditions as the ruler. The Lepchas and
Bhutias signed the Blood-Brotherhood Treaty of 1268 at Kabi and the patch of forest has since
been revered and regarded as sacred. Large stone monoliths, locally called Longchuk, which stood
out in the forest area, were considered natural witnesses and placed in the Kabi grove during this
celebration (known as Chyu-Slo-Nylso). The event is today celebrated as Pang-Lhabsol, a very
important annual festival for Sikkimese Lepchas.
Another interesting aspect of this area and the festival is located in Lepcha folklore with a
very different narrative. The story dates back to antiquity when the rivers Teesta and Rangit are
said to have originated following a severe earthquake. A great deluge ensued, and many lost
their lives. The subsequent floods forced the Lepchas to take shelter at higher elevations on the
mountain slopes. Those who survived the devastation initiated the tradition of worshiping each
of the mountain tops where they had sought refuge. These peaks were worshipped as ‘Saviour
Mountains’ and Kabi is one among them. Even now prayers are offered on the night of the full
moon in the ninth month of the Lepcha lunar calendar.
Local communities extract little from the grove—only small amounts of NTFP, fodder and fallen
branches are collected. As such there is no formal institution of management for the sacred grove,
although occasionally meetings are and can be held to address issues of resource removal. Villagers
from the surrounding areas have met often to discuss these issues. The discussions have included
resource extraction, but local villagers usually attribute this to non-locals such as daily wage
labourers, construction workers and road-building camps.
The general tree density of the grove has been estimated at 156 trees/ha, with a mean basal
area at 6138sq.m. Dominant tree species are birch, oak and magnolia (Betula cylindrostachya,
Castanopsis hystrix and Michelia cathcartii). Other key species include Cinnamomum impressinervium
(cinnamon), Daphniphyllum himalayense, Eurya acuminata, Machilus edulis, Nyssa javanica,
Prunus nepalensis (cherry), Quercus sp., and Spondias axillaris.

3.2. Dzumsa or the pipen system in North Sikkim15

The alpine meadows and the high arid plateaus of north Sikkim are home to a unique system of
decision-making that affects not only natural resource management but also governs the livelihood
activities of the Lachenpa (people from Lachen valley) and Lachungpa (those from Lachung valley)
communities of the region. Pastoralism, the region’s major livelihood, was acutely affected by
political changes in China during the 1950s and subsequent conflicts between India and China.
Since the hostilities, local pastoralists have lost access to traditional grazing areas and markets
in Tibet with the result that livestock profitability decreased and other livelihoods were explored
and pursued. Over the last century the Lachenpa and Lachungpa have taken on other livelihood
activities such as fruit production (apples were introduced by Europeans during the last century)
and tourism.
Management and control over community activities is exercised by an organisation called the
dzumsa, composed of the heads of all households. Meetings are held in a public hall called the
Mong-Khyim, and once a year the dzumsa elects a pipen (often older respected males) to lead
the community’s livelihood activities and a Gen-me (or Council, composed of a body of respected
elders) to assist the pipen in settling disputes within the community. Two Gyapen or assistants are
also appointed to assist the pipen in his duties.
At meetings of the village council, the pipen designates summer areas for grazing by cattle and
y g alpine
yaks in the high p pastures. Local people are informed of the demarcated areas, each of which
is assigned a specific grazing time. Graziers move with their animals from
one area to another according to the schedule drawn up by the dzumsa.
During the peak summer months, the graziers reach Chho Lhamu (a lake in
northern Sikkim) and during the winter months the cows are brought down to
temperate forest areas near Toong while the yaks are kept at higher elevations
around the Shingba Rhododendron Sanctuary. The pipen also demarcates
areas and a schedule for collecting fodder in the winter months. Only one
area is worked at a time. Decisions regarding the extraction of timber, fuelwood,
stone, sand and other natural resources, dates for cultivation and harvesting of
agricultural crops, and the collection and harvesting of medicinal plants are also
 Sikkim 637

controlled by the pipen.16

Violation of rules and regulations set at the village councils invites punishment that can take the
form of social boycotts or fines. Fines are channelled towards community development through
the dzumsa. A certain amount of tax per animal is also collected annually and deposited with
the dzumsa. Some of these funds are available to the community in the form of soft loans for
community development.
In case of disputes regarding the regulations, the disputants approach the pipen with a scarf and
a rupee note. Once the case is accepted, a meeting is called where both the parties bring some
food and chhang, the local liquor. Once the matter is decided, this food is served to the gathering
to celebrate, and the guilty party pays a monetary fine.
Three members of the Lachung community were nabbed poaching musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster)
in a combing operation in 1977. The FD sent them to jail for two months. When they returned, the
dzumsa met and passed a resolution warning future poachers with social boycott, despite the fact
that there is no prohibition on the killing of musk deer under traditional Lepcha law. There is no
worse punishment for the people of Lachung than social boycott. No cases of poaching have been
reported from the region since.
Although there is an element of community resource management in pipen regulatory systems,
the areas over which pipens exercise control are considered the property of the state. With
increasing pressures on the valuable timber resources of north Sikkim, the pipen system is under
considerable pressure to be incorporated into wider administrative processes and policies. The
good news is that Government officials have recently begun interacting with the pipens. In March
1998, a case of encroachment by the army in the forest area was brought to the notice of the
FD as a case of violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980. The Army had razed the natural
embankment of a sacred lake to improve vehicular access to the lake. A gurudwara (a Sikh temple)
had also been constructed at the site and the name of the lake changed to Nanak Jheel, hurting
local sentiment as the lake had been named after Padmasambhava. The Chief Secretary took up
the matter and consulted the pipen in this matter. In the context of a focus on small-scale resource
management committees, it is imperative that this traditional decision-making arrangement is
recognized and built upon in all decentralized decision-making processes of the government.

3.3. Participatory tourism monitoring by the Khangchendzonga

Conservation Committee (KCC), Yuksam17
Tourism in Yuksam began during the early 80s and has grown steadily since. The primary attraction
is trekking into what is now Khangchendzonga Biosphere Reserve and National Park, following the
trail of pastoralists through rich, verdant forests into high alpine pastures and passes. Apart from
commercial tourism operations, the Himalayan Mountaineering Institute (HMI) conducts several
adventure and basic mountaineering courses annually with large numbers of participants and
support staff. The growth in tourism presented a livelihood opportunity for local residents since
Yuksam lay at the start of the trekking trail. However, in the mid to late 1990s, local community
members began to express concern about some of the impacts tourism was having in the area
and in the National Park. They recognised that it was the presence of natural wealth in the area
that provided the main attraction to visitors, and realized that efforts needed to be made to
conserve these resources upon which their incomes and livelihoods were dependent. They realized
that unchecked and unregulated tourism
growth could, in the long term, endanger and
threaten the very resources that attracted
visitors to their village.
To address these issues and bring
state chapter - sikkim

awareness among the local people, the local

youth formed a small but active community
organisation, the KCC, with a focus on
natural resource conservation, conservation
education and income generation. Members
of the committee have conducted several
awareness camps; training courses for
tourism service providers such as porters,
cooks and guides; and other conservation-
related activities. In 1999, the KCC started
Herders using traditonal skills to become eco-guides
a participatory monitoring programme of the Photo: Sandeep Tambe
638 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

major trekking trail inside the National Park and in the surrounding areas. Unable to exert any
active decision-making role in the management of the protected area, they felt that one important
role they could play was to monitor the condition of resources and use this to influence users of
the park (primarily HMI) and the State FD.

Box 1
Objectives of the KCC Participatory Monitoring
• To monitor the garbage status, trail condition and trekker’s huts and campsite facilities in the
trekking corridor (Yuksam–Dzongri–Base Camp).
• To monitor the use of firewood by the trekkers, travel agents (if any), trekking support staff,
trekkers’ huts, caretakers and the members of HMI.
• Prepare reports to submit to relevant agencies like Department of Tourism, Forest & Wildlife
Department and NGOs, and disseminate information in the village community for awareness
and support.
• Interact with and involve visitors, trekkers and local tourism entrepreneurs in the participatory
monitoring of tourism activities and in the process empower them to take decisions and
advocate for conservation initiatives.

To begin their work on participatory monitoring of tourism activities, KCC invited key local people
and National Park staff from the village for a general meeting. The objectives of the participatory
monitoring study were highlighted and consensus was arrived at with the villagers about participating
in the proposed study. Having received positive responses from the community, a brainstorming
session was conducted with villagers to evolve strategies for involving local people in the monitoring
activities. Participants also noted the roles of relevant agencies that could be involved so that
appropriate actions could be taken. The outcome of the meeting was a list of possible activities
and the names of local people apart from KCC members who would be actively involved and
could contribute significantly. Consultation and assistance from external agencies were sought to
make an effective work plan that would address the issues of monitoring tourism activities and
conservation impacts. Having set their targets, several meetings were conducted in the village to
make local people and those involved in tourism enterprises aware as to why such an initiative was
important and how local people could participate and contribute. The different activities that were
conducted in the participatory monitoring of tourism activities are listed below:
• Preliminary awareness meetings in the village with local people. Making an effort to involve all
tourism stakeholders to take an active role in monitoring tourism activities in and around their
area.
• Survey of the trekking trail and tourist facilities along the trekking trail.
• Status report of the tourism facilities, impacts and other issues documented and prepared in
collaboration with a group of students from Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay.
• Monitoring formats and questionnaire developed to collect information and data on types of
tourists visiting the area, different tourism activities and their subsequent impacts, information
on flora and fauna, and camping facilities for trekkers.
• Meeting with the Forest and Tourism Department staff to tell them about the situation of the
trekking trail, tourist facilities and measures that could be taken up to address the impacts of
tourism.
• Meeting with the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to update him about the community
initiatives that were being undertaken, and how the FD could further extend support to their
initiatives in the long term.
• Meeting with the HMI staff to talk about strategies to manage their training programs in order
that they adopt more environmentally sound and responsible practices and adopt the code of
conduct developed by the KCC members.
• Proposal developed and submitted to Tourism Department for funds to do a clean-up of the
trekking trail and camping sites which are heavily degraded and polluted.
 Sikkim 639

Much of the work is still under progress. Data that have been collected are being analysed to
convert them into reports for dissemination. Preliminary reports have been prepared and submitted
to relevant government agencies and community stakeholders.
More recently, KCC has also helped to coordinate the preparation of a biodiversity strategy and
action plan for the Rathong Chu area, under the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
process of the Government of India.18
Himal Rakshaks
Almost 60% of Sikkim is classified as Reserved Forest. The sub-alpine and alpine landscape
of the Sikkim Himalayas, locally known as himal, is an ecologically sensitive area. It serves as
habitat to various animals like the snow leopard, musk deer and black necked crane and houses
the rich biodiversity of the area. It also forms the headwaters of several perennial rivers. Thus
conserving this area is of prime importance. The upper sections of the mountains have not
been successfully protected due to various reasons including the harsh terrain, climate, high
altitude and the paucity of personnel and funding.
The Himal Rakshak programme was officially launched on the 5th of June 2006 as a solution to
this problem. This is a voluntary programme where independent individuals who practice high
altitude subsistence livelihood could enlist as HimalRakshaks (honorary mountain guardians)
with Forest Department and help in the conservation management of the himal. In return,
the volunteers can continue their subsistence livelihood activities in the himal, in a regulated
manner.
After being launched in 2006, the programme has continued with the support of various
organisations.

4. Conclusions
Sikkim has several interesting examples of community conservation activities, not all of which can
be considered as traditional efforts by communities
to protect forested or other areas for posterity.
However, these traditional initiatives and the more
recent changes and interventions do represent
opportunities to explore and establish collaborative
efforts in conservation.
Effective conservation of resources requires
more than just one approach, and Sikkim is
fortunate to have several that can be the basis of
a diverse strategy. Perhaps the strongest element
in supporting and promoting community-based
conservation efforts in the state lies in the deep
respect and spiritual values that many Sikkimese
have not just for mountains but also for the Zemu glacier Khangchendzonga National Park
landscape as a whole. Photo: Sandeep Tambe

The author would like to thank Renzino Lepcha (TMI), Lalit Rai (GBPIHED), Nakul Chettri
(ATREE), Chewang Bhutia, Pema Gyaltsen (both from KCC) and Eklabya Sharma (formerly with
GBPIHED and now with ICIMOD), who made significant contributions. The editors would like
to acknowledge the help of Nakul Chettri (by then in ICIMOD) in clarifying some doubts during
the final editing of this book. Substantial portions of this paper have been taken from Sikkim
state chapter - sikkim

State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan.20

Endnotes
1
Department of Forest, Environment and Wildlife, Sikkim State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Prepared under
National Biodiversity Strategy & Action Plan – India. Included in CD with TPCG and Kalpavriksh Securing India’s
Future: Technical Report of the NBSAP (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).
2
As above.
3
H.G. Champion and S.K. Seth, Forest Types of India (Dehra Dun, Forest Research Institute, 1968).
640 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory
4
P.S. Ramakrishnan, ‘Conserving the Sacred: Ecological and Policy Implications’, in A. Kothari, N. Pathak, R.V.
Anuradha and B. Taneja (eds), Communities and Conservation: Natural Resource Management in South and Central
Asia (New Delhi, Sage Publications, 1998).
5
Information from the Sikkim Science Society.
6
E. Sharma, K.K. Singh, and G. Sharma, ‘A boon for mountain populations : Large cardamom farming in the Sikkim
Himalaya’, Mountain Research and Development 20(2) (2000), pp. 108-11 .
7
Government of India, ‘Forest cover mapping through digital image processing of Indian remote sensing satellite data
with special reference to Sikkim - Procedural manual and inventory’ (Joint collaboration project of forest department,
Govt. of Sikkim and Regional Remote Sensing Service Centre, Kharagpur, Indian Space Research Organization,
Department of Space, Government of India, 1994).
8
Kazis are a group of Sikkimese considered as wealthy landlords.
9
State Forest Department, State Forestry Action Plan (Gangtok, Forest Department, 1996).
10
Proposals are under preparation by the FD to promote participatory conservation around Khangchendzonga
Biosphere Reserve, and for other sanctuaries in south and west Sikkim. This includes a Himal Rakshak programme in
which graziers are appointed as honorary wardens of the reserve, in lieu of continued access to grazing routes (see
www.tmi-india.org).
11
Ramakrishnan, ‘Conserving the Sacred’. (As above)
12
Information from the Sikkim Science Society.
13
Ramakrishnan recommends that the entire region from Khangchendzonga to the Yuksam lowlands be declared a
National Heritage Site. Ramakrishnan, ‘Conserving the Sacred’. (As above). At the time of going to press, monks and
other citizens of the area had once again risen up to protest proposals for a series of dams that will severely damage
the environment and cultural integrity of the area.
14
Edited from material provided by Lalit Rai, G.B Pant Institute, Gangtok.
15
Edited from material provided by Renzino Lepcha.
16
S.C. Rai, E. Sharma and R.C. Sundriyal, ‘Conservation in the Sikkim Himalaya: Traditional knowledge and land use
of the Mamlay watershed’, Environmental Conservation 15 (1994), pp. 30-5.
17
Edited from material provided by the Khanchendzonga Conservation Committee
18
Department of Forest, Environment and Wildlife, Rathong Chu Valley (Sikkim) Substate Biodiversity Strategy
and Action Plan. Prepared under the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Included in CD with TPCG and
Kalpavriksh Securing India’s Future: Technical Report of the NBSAP (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).
19
Source: 1. ‘Himal Rakshaks to Guard Sikkim’s Most Valuable Treasure’ by Sandeep Tambe, Nima Tashi Bhutia,
M.L.Arrawatia (http://scstsenvis.nic.in/Himal%20rakshak.pdf)
2. ‘Sindrabong Khangchendzonga Eco-friendly Society surge ahead with eco plans’ Sikkim Express, 5th January
2008
20
Department of Forest, Environment and Wildlife, Sikkim State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. (As above).
Tamil Nadu
Community conservation in Tamil Nadu
Shantha Bhushan
Author’s note: This study was carried out with the help of several individuals and groups in Tamil Nadu. The
paucity of information on coastal conservation in this chapter does not indicate that there is no community-based
conservation here, but only that documentation is insufficient.

1. Background
1.1. Geographic profile
Covering 130,058 sq km of south-east India, the state of Tamil Nadu is blessed with a tremendous
diversity of natural resources. The principal crops grown in the state are paddy, millets, cereals,
pulses, sugarcane and groundnut. Tamil Nadu receives rainfall from the north-east monsoon
between the months of October and December, and some parts of the state such as the Nilgiris
benefit from the south-west monsoon in the months of May and June.

1.2. Ecological profile

The state is characterised by three distinct ecoregions:
• The Eastern coastal plains, a long
and wide stretch of land lying
between the Eastern Ghats and
the Bay of Bengal, are dissected by
broad valleys and deltas of major
rivers such as Cauvery that flow
through the state. The 1,067 km
coastline comprises 13 coastal
districts and 591 marine fishing
villages. Rainfall in the region varies
between 100 to 300 cm annually.
• The Eastern Ghats have rugged,
hilly terrain, run parallel to the
east coast and cover Dharamapuri,
North Arcot, Salem and parts of Pelicans and other waterbirds at Koonthakulam, Tirunelveli
Nilgiri district. The western and district Photo: S. Subramanya
eastern flanks receive annual
rainfall between 80 and 200 cm while the central parts are quite dry. The uplands of the Eastern
Ghats are comprised mainly of the hill ranges of Javadi, Shevaroy, Kalrayan, Pachchamalai and
Kanjanmalai. The hill ranges form a chain of low, flat hills dissected by the Ponnaiyar, Cauvery
and Vellar rivers. The high mountains of Nilgiri district rise at the tail end of the Eastern Ghats
and mark the meeting point of the Eastern and Western Ghats. This region is the watershed of
perennial rivers like the Cauvery, Amaravathi, Vaigai and Tamaraparini.
state chapter - tamil nadu

• The Western Ghats constitute a narrow but long range of hills running from the north to south
along the western coast of India. These hills separate the western coastal plains from the drier
parts of the Deccan plateau. The ecologically rich Western Ghats extend from Nilgiri District into
Kanyakumari and Tirunelveli districts.

1.3. Socio-economic profile

Tamil Nadu has a population (2001) of about 62.5 million, with about 35 million in rural and 27.5
million in urban areas. The population is predominantly Hindu, comprising about 88 per cent, while
Muslims and Christians comprise about 5-6 per cent each.1
In the past the economy was largely agriculture- and fisheries–based. The population was mainly
rural in the erstwhile Madras Presidency (which also had some parts of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka
643
644 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

and Kerala ), of which Chennai (earlier called Madras) was the capital. Post-independence, the
nature of the economy changed to one based on industry and agriculture. High levels of education
and industrialization in the inland areas have led to increased urbanization, and a reduction in
dependence on wild biodiversity. Over the last five decades there has been a boom in the number
of small towns. Thus the need to protect natural resources, especially habitats containing wild
biodiversity, has not been strongly felt by people in the inland areas.
The other ecosystem-dependent community is that of fisherfolk along the eastern coast. As in
other coastal areas of India, there are problems due to mechanisation, trawling, and increasing
human population, leading to depletion of fish stock and marine life. The Gulf of Mannar (a Biosphere
Reserve) is one such example where the population and diversity of marine life is reported to be
declining. In spite of intense conflicts between traditional fishing practices and modern trawling,
there is scope for communities to conserve their areas proactively, as demonstrated by fisherfolk
at Pulicat lagoon. Here, fisherfolk practice a sustainable form of fishing but their traditional systems
of fishing are currently under threat from development projects (See Case Studies).

2. A Brief history of administrative control over land and

resources
2.1. The pre-colonial era
Village sabhas (assemblies) enjoyed considerable local autonomy in Tamil Nadu during the Pallava
and Chola periods (600-1300 AD). These sabhas appointed several committees or variyam with
distinct responsibilities: for instance, the yeri variyam was responsible for the village lake or tank,
and the thotam variayam looked after the village gardens. Tanks, streams, channels and pastures
were considered common property. There are records dating back to the Pallava era which indicate
that misuse of common property was punished. According to Dharampal,2 villages (through the
village accountant or karnam) maintained land records.
Dams were built across river Cauvery to divert water for cultivation in the Chola period. Though
the planning and building of dams was considered a central responsibility, their maintenance was
entrusted to local communities.3

2.2. The colonial era

The decline of the gram sabhas began with the British takeover of revenue control. In 1860,
the British established that the land revenue should on the average be equal to half the net
produce and 33 per cent of the gross produce for dry lands and 40 per cent for wetlands. The
consequence of this was economic depression and wholesale desertion of land and breakdown of
traditional institutions. There were repeated famines and an unprecedented rise in prices. This led
to the almost complete destruction of the village systems. Land management systems such as
Samudhayam (community ownership of land and equitable sharing of its yield) almost disappeared
by the mid-20th century.4 Under British Dominion, the Madras Presidency appointed a Conservator
of Forests as early as 1806. The first Conservator went about surveying the state of forests
and demarcated commercially viable forests. Later, a variety of protection regimes of forests
were introduced. In 1823, Governor Thomas Munro abolished the position of Conservator in the
belief that supply and demand would stimulate private afforestation if timber supplies ran low.5
In the years following this, there was considerable exploitation of forests for railway construction
and consequent degradation of forests, both under government control as well as under private
ownership.6
Large expanses of forests were also converted into plantations of coffee, tea and cardamom,
especially in the Nilgiris in the early 19th century, contributing to habitat fragmentation. This has been
particularly problematic for elephants. Much degradation was also caused by the forest department
policy of encouraging plantations of exotic fast-growing species such as pine, eucalyptus, and
wattle (often in the face of massive opposition by the local populace that depended on these
forests for survival). In the Nilgiris, such plantations affected the grassland–shola ecosystem and
had ecological impacts such as the drying-up of streams and increased soil erosion. The Madras
Forest Act was enacted in 1882.

2.3. Post-Independence
The enactment of the Madras Panchayat Bill of 1958 was an attempt at reviving local self-
governing bodies, but this did not succeed. As Ramachandra Guha7 points out, ‘destruction of
 Tamil Nadu 645

ecological resource base has rendered the once possibly highly adaptive organization of caste
society largely maladaptive.’ The change in ownership of land and resources and the resultant
change in the institutions and institutional structures seems almost irreversible.
The forest department traditionally concentrated on conserving the rich evergreen and moist
deciduous forests of the Western Ghats. Till the 1980s, of a total of 2,112 sq km of Protected Areas
in Tamil Nadu, about 2,027 sq km (95.97 per cent) were located in this ecoregion.8 After the mid
1980s, conservation emphasis has been on natural forest for improving and enhancing intangible
benefits. The forest department also started research on understanding population dynamics of
flora and fauna in representative forest types. Importance was also given to augment produce of
NTFP (Non-Timber Forest Produce) within and outside protected areas (PAs).
It is estimated that about 7,000 sq km of forest land, interfacing with about 3,100 villages, was
under various stages of degradation.9 This was mainly due to excessive cattle grazing, illicit felling,
recurrent forest fires and encroachment. Social forestry programmes were started in 1982 to
address these problems. In the second phase of the Social Forestry project in 1988, an innovative
component called ‘Interface Forestry Programme’ was introduced. This programme was not very
successful, partly because of a standardised rather than a site-specific implementation approach.
In a critique of the social foresty process in Tamil Nadu, K. Balsaubramanian10 has pointed out that
‘people’s participation cannot be programmed. Social Forestry and natural resource management
is an extensive intricate task that requires location specific approach.’ According to him, the issues
of natural resource management are of such magnitude that even a macro-level institution like
the government will not be in a position to address issues at the appropriate time. In terms of
economics also such an approach may not be cost-effective. In his opinion, sustainability of such
programmes can only be ensured by meaningful participation of the local communities. ‘It is
important to realize that a benefit sharing process will work only if the project fits the felt needs
of the community. A standardized benefit sharing process will not work even if the framework is
good.’ When the state realized that this approach of social forestry was not suitable, Joint Forest
Management was seen as the solution towards arresting degradation of forests.11 In 1992 the
state initiated a 5-year scheme, referred to as the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Development Project
(TNADP), which aimed at increasing agricultural production by improving degraded forest areas
and implementing water augmentation works. The strategy adopted was that of participatory forest
management with the involvement of communities by constitution of village-level committees.
The process of benefit sharing was outlined in a Government Order (GO MS.No.8: Environment
and Forests (FR VI) dated 04-01-1993). However this scheme was not successful in achieving its
objectives, reportedly because it was implemented as yet another departmental plantation scheme
without the staff having internalised the concept of community participation.
The state passed a Joint Forest Management resolution in 1997 (GO No. 42, dated 8-8-1997),
stating the objective that the ‘Government of Tamil Nadu stands committed to involve local people
in reforestation and protection of degraded forests and to share with them the sustainable benefits
from these forests.’ With the end of TNADP, the Tamil Nadu Afforestation Project (TAP) was
launched in 1997-98, with the objective of ecological restoration with the fullest participation of
people through JFM. This project is scheduled for a five-year period with an annual target of 200
villages, each village covering approximately 300 ha of degraded forests. With the project getting
over in 2002, the role of the community in protection of these lands needs to be assessed.
An interesting and important feature has been that of multi-sectoral integration. The Chief
Secretary, Tamil Nadu, has asked all district collectors to follow integration of various department
activities in the villages where TAP was being implemented (vide D.O letter no 1251/FR.V/98-2,
Environment and Forests, 4th April 1998). The Tamil Nadu government has constituted district-
level Joint Forest Management Committees, with the district collector as chairman (GO Ms No 166/
E&F/FR VI Department, dated 11.6.98). The District Forest Officer will act as member secretary.
state chapter - tamil nadu

The committee has to review the functioning of Village Forest Councils and achievements of JFM
in 23 districts where the programme is being implemented. This committee meets once in two
months to identify the integration of forestry with other sectors and functioning of village forest
councils. However, whether this integration has actually happened and whether it leads towards a
participatory method of conservation needs to be assessed.12

3. Origins of community conservation

3.1. History of community conservation efforts
Historically, Tamil Nadu was divided into several tinnai or zones, some named after a flower,
such as kurinji (hill regions), marudham (fields in riverine plains), neidhal (coastal regions) and
paalai (wasteland).
646 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Apart from numerous historical references to the close association between the Tamil people
and their natural resources (such as the functioning of the variyams), there are many telling
examples in Tamil literature. The state’s abundant natural wealth is reflected in poems such as the
Malaipadupakam (sound of the mountain), Nedunalavadai (good, long north-wind) and Kurinjipatta
(mountain song) among others. The Kurinjipatta lists 99 different flowers of the mountains. Villages
were often named after the closest hill (suffix: malai or kundru), lakes (suffix: eeri) and tanks
(suffix: kulam). Several others were named after trees, flowers, mammals or birds.
Ancient temples were closely associated with groves, as evidenced in the epic poem Silapadikaram,
which describes a number of groves such as ilavandigaisolai, sampaathi solai and kaveri vanam in
the Chola port of Poompuhar. The poems of the saints (known as Alwars) describe the beautiful
groves around the holy temple of Srirangam.
Thirunandavan-kaingkarya (special grants from the king) were made to thirunandavanu-puram
(temple gardens and orchards). The tiruvalangadu plates of King Rajendra Chola (10th century
AD) describe parts of a village endowed to the local Shiva temple: ‘All the land within the four
boundaries including wetlands, dry lands, village sites, houses, house gardens, streams, rivers,
ponds … land where iguanas run or tortoises creep.’13
As in other parts of India, the worship of trees was prevalent among the Tamils. There are
numerous references in Sangam literature to the commonly held belief that trees were the abode
of gods. The tree that was worshipped subsequently developed into the sthalavriksha of the temple
with which it was associated.14 When temples were erected for the god who resided in the sacred
tree, people took special care not to damage the tree. The tree actually forms the garbha-griha
(sanctum sanctorum) of several of these temples.
Almost all the state’s temples are associated with a holy tree and a legend. Kanchipuram is named
after the kanchi tree, and Chidambaram or Tillaivanam is named after tillai (mangroves). During
the 18th and 19th centuries, sthala puranas were written about the temples, each emphasizing the
characteristics of the sthalavriksha (holy tree) and teertha (water source). About 357 sthala and
60 sthalavriksha have been recorded in Tamil Nadu.15 The tradition of worshipping sacred trees
continues today; sometimes the stump is worshipped even after the tree is dead.
Many temples also had a small tank that was part of the temple complex and was considered
sacred. The sacred tanks were believed to serve the ecological function of attracting clouds and
ensuring that water-table levels were sustained. The CPR Foundation for Environment Education
is documenting sacred tanks. The revival of sacred tanks could have an important role considering
the extreme water shortage that the state has been facing in the last few years.
In the following sections, community conservation initiatives in the state under three categories
have been explored: (i) sacred groves, (ii) irrigation tanks, and (iii) natural wetlands.

3.2 Sacred groves

Patches of forest preserved by local communities out of love, fear or reverence, the sacred groves
of Tamil Nadu (kovilkaadagul or mara kaavagula) are an essential part of the state’s landscape.
They are dedicated to the feminine deities, Amman, Kaliamman and Mariamman, or to masculine
forms such as Muniyandi and Karuppan. Almost every village in the state has at least an acre of
land dedicated to the local deity. The groves are small, usually ranging from half a hectare to 20
hectares, but a few are as large as 500 ha.
The sacred groves of Tamil Nadu represent a variety of vegetation types ranging from evergreen
to semi-evergreen to dry deciduous type depending on the region. The climax vegetation species
in the drier regions of the plains are predominantly ironwood, East Indian satinwood, Capparis
bush and siris. In high altitude areas, species such as Indian wild lime, hardwood tree, arjun
and sandalwood are found. Some rare, endangered and threatened plant species (many of them
medicinal) are found in sacred groves.
Apart from fulfilling several ecological functions, the regular celebration of festivals in sacred
groves played an important part in fostering stronger ties between local communities.

3.2.1. Institutional structures in the conservation of sacred groves

Sacred groves are located on temple lands that are either owned by the forest department or
temple Trusts, or lie in village commons. The ownership pattern seems to vary. For example,
many sacred groves in the forested regions of Eastern and Western Ghats were large and at some
point declared reserved forests (thus currently under state ownership), but existing customs and
traditions were usually allowed to continue. This contrasts with the situation in the plains, where
 Tamil Nadu 647

many villages had a temple with a garden (nandavanam), situated in the centre of the village,
and also a sacred grove on the outskirts of the village (which often served as a windbreak). The
ownership of this kind of sacred grove would usually be with the panchayat or sometimes with a
trust.
Practices associated with conserving sacred groves are deep-rooted and cut across caste barriers.
In some cases, the groves are considered a renewable resource base, from where locals can
collect twigs, dead wood, fruits and herbs. In several cases, however, even the removal of twigs
is taboo. Some of the taboos that have been and are still practised are: prohibition on felling of
trees, footwear not allowed, animals not to be harmed, etc. There was also considerable fear
that breaking taboos could lead to failure of crops or pestilence. Sometimes animal sacrifice, fire-
walking and suchlike practices were and are still practiced in these groves.
Of the terracotta figurines16 of bulls, elephants and horses that decorate each grove, the making
of the Ayyanar’s17 horse and its dedication is still an important event in villages around the state.

3.2.2. Constraints and opportunities for the conservation of sacred groves

Documentation conducted by the CPR Foundation Environment Education Centre (CPR-EEC),
Chennai, reveals at least 448 existing sacred groves in different parts of Tamil Nadu, of which
about 80 per cent are reasonably well protected.18 The groves are concentrated in the Perambalur,
Tiruvannamalai and Tiruchirapalli districts. The Foundation has started a programme on restoration
of groves. This has provided telling insights into the willingness of communities to participate in
such an endeavour: in some villages, people expressed fears of the government or implementing
agency usurping community lands. Fear of the deity, in several cases, also acted as a deterrent
against restoration.
In 1998, the CPR-EEC, with local communities, began restoring degraded sacred groves in 14
villages. Restoration activities are centred on the clearing of thorny shrubs, fencing the grove, soil-
working and, finally, selection of species to be planted. In restoration taken up by CPR-EEC, the
response has been encouraging in terms of community participation and biodiversity conservation
of the grove.19

3.3. Water resource conservation

The eeris (yeri) or kanmoi of Tamil Nadu, keres of Karnataka, and the cheruvu of Andhra Pradesh
all refer to tanks spread over the entire Deccan plateau and dating back at least 2000 years. Even
today, more than 140,000 small and big tanks spread over the Deccan provide not less than 25 per
cent of the total irrigation requirement of the region. To give an idea of the extent of irrigation and
the scale of revenue: the Veeranum tank in South Arcot district supplied water to 149 villages and
provided a revenue of Rs 1,14,150 in the year 1850.20 Eeris are especially important in dry areas
of Tamil Nadu such as Ramanathapuram district.
The tanks were maintained largely for irrigation and drinking water, but several tanks have a
considerable diversity of trees species that attract many species of nesting and migratory birds.
The Directory of Indian Wetlands, prepared by WWF-India,21 highlights many such tanks in the
state. There are many instances of heronries on tanks that were maintained by communities being
declared bird sanctuaries under the Wild Life (Protection) Act (e.g., Chittarangudi, Vedanthangal).
The declaration of these tanks as sanctuaries meant that the role of community in use and
maintenance was stopped or reduced. Earlier the communities had specified systems of sharing
water, maintaining the tank and regular desilting of the tanks. Once the forest department took
over the tanks, it had to wait for funds to do the desilting (which is very important as the silt is
state chapter - tamil nadu

used as fertiliser in fields and also ensures sustained water storage in the tank). At Chittarangudi
sanctuary, the village now depends on the forest department for desilting the tank, on which they
depend heavily for irrigation.
The famous Vendanthangal bird sanctuary, one of the oldest sanctuaries in India, was established
in 1925.22 Vedanthangal literally translates as ‘ban on hunting’, a system practiced and enforced
by villagers residing and farming near this tank. The farmers valued the birds for the fertilizer
provided by the guano. In the late 18th century, British soldiers regularly held shoots at the tanks,
events that were strongly objected to by local villagers. In 1790, after repeated attempts, the local
villagers were able to obtain a cowle or Document of Rights from the first Collector of the East India
Company for Chengelput district, preventing the hunting of birds in the tank and granting official
recognition of the local communities right to protect the birds of the tank. The original document
was lost and the villagers re-applied for this recognition in 1858. In 1936, the then Collector, a Mr
648 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Todd, issued an order stating: ‘Vedanthangal is a bird sanctuary and has been kept as such by the
villagers for over a century. Notice in English and Tamil should be painted on wooden boards and
set up at each end of the tank bund.’
The Vedanthangal tank continues to be managed by the forest department. The sanctuary is now
threatened by large numbers of tourists, a pressure that is especially intense during the breeding
season. This tank is an important breeding area for colonial nesting waterbirds, and a critical
roosting site for many breeding birds and a large number of migratory waterfowl. Here the two
trees of special significance are Barringtonia acutangula and Alangium salvifolium. It is not known
what the present role of the community is in protection and maintenance of the tank.
In a similar initiative, the villagers of Chittarangudi do not burst crackers during the festival
of Diwali, for fear of scaring the birds away from the village tank. They are also known to nurse
injured birds back to health. The villagers are quite proud of the fact that they are known as people
who protect birds. The tank is important for the economy, as the village is mainly dependent on
agriculture. The tank is an important source of water and the bird droppings serve as good organic
fertilizer (See Case Studies).
In sharp contrast to Vedanthangal and Chittarangudi, there are some village tanks in Madurai
district where birds are hunted by methods as crude as crackers and explosives, and tanks are
maintained only for agriculture and fishing. It has been observed that communities in areas that
are resource-rich are negligent in contrast to areas where there is scarcity. An example of the
latter is the rain-shadow area of Ramanathpuram district, where people are very careful in use of
resources.

3.3.1. Institutional structures in the management of irrigation tanks

The development of the tanks were traditionally undertaken by local chieftains with technical
advice from specialist surveyors and craftsmen, and construction by villagers. One of the main
functions of the ancient gram sabhas (village assemblies) was managing the village irrigation
tanks. Revenue generated from the tank (farmers, known as ayacutdars—ayacut is a measure of
land irrigated—pay for the water they get and have responsibilities in protecting the tank water),
and the corpus fund was generally sufficient to pay local villagers who undertook repairs and
maintenance. Apparently each village had different rules, but broadly the system involved the
stakeholders paying for the services and sharing the work of maintenance.
This system was disrupted under British dominion, as they introduced several settlements23
and began taxing revenues earned from irrigation tanks. Net money available after taxation
was considerably reduced, and gradually eroded the ability of village institutions to manage the
tanks.
In the middle of the 19th century, the irrigation tanks were brought under the PWD (Public Works
Department) of the Madras Presidency. The Madras Compulsory Labour Act was passed in 1858,
forcing local communities to provide labour for repair and maintenance of the tanks.24 This system
did not work and tanks continued to disintegrate. The situation has not changed much post-
independence: decision-making and tank administration continue to be centralised and village
panchayats do not play an important role in their management. Most tanks belong to and are
managed by different government bodies, leaving limited space for community participation.
In the 1970s, the PWD began a tank modernization programme focused on
equitable benefit-sharing and the prevention of water seepage. This scheme
was not successful, as it did not take traditional management structures
into account and also did not involve farmers.

3.3.2. Constraints and opportunities for conservation in tanks

Even though these tanks are human-made structures and are usually
constructed for drinking water or irrigation purposes, they serve an important part
in harbouring wildlife. They also provide sources of revenue from trees planted
on bunds and foreshores, fish and silt. Middlemen, contractors or corrupt officials
are often reported to be siphoning off these revenues, and only a negligible amount
reaches the government. In this process, both villagers and the government lose out,
leaving the farmers weaker and the village economy more fragile.
As a part of the Social Forestry Programme, afforestation was tried out on foreshore
of tanks and other common areas. This was not successful because the people
 Tamil Nadu 649

rejected the choice of species and the manner in which the programme was implemented.
There are efforts to revive community management of tanks. Recently an organization called DHAN
(Development of Humane Action) Foundation25 has started helping people organize themselves
into groups called Tank Farmers Associations (TFAs) in Madurai and Ramanthapuram districts.
In the last few years, these associations have gained in strength and proved that they have the
potential to manage and safeguard the tanks. This concept seems to be gaining in strength.

3.4. Natural wetlands

There are a few wetlands mainly adjoining coastal areas, or near mangrove forests. Confusion
regarding ownership, rights and management of these wetlands has left limited scope for community-
based conservation. Many of these wetlands dry up in summer, and livelihoods dependent on these
are therefore seasonal. An interesting example is that of Pulicat lake (see case study for more
details), where the fisherfolk have an elaborate system to regulate fishing, and have also opposed
development projects that have negatively impacted the biodiversity of the complex lagoon system
and therefore the livelihoods of the fisherfolk.
Local community movements have also helped reduce the threats to some other waterbodies.
The Noyyal river that flows through Coimbatore district is an important source of water. There is a
concentration of industries, especially knitwear, which has resulted in considerable pollution of the
river and groundwater in the area. In 1992, the Orthapalayam dam was constructed about 10 km
from Tirupur to provide irrigation for 8,000 ha. Since the catchment area of the river has polluting
industries, the dam became a reservoir for polluted water. In February 1997, there was no flow of
water from the Cauvery and the stored water was becoming dangerous; the effluent-laden water
was released from the dam, which led to the death of many animals. There was concerted, regular
opposition by the local farmers associations against this pollution, and release of such waters for
irrigation.
The flourishing leather industry in Vellore led to pollution of groundwater, destruction of farmlands
and considerable health impact on humans and cattle population here. The leather industry is an
important foreign-exchange earner and it was only when the people protested against this that
any action was taken by the government. A PIL was launched by the people under the ‘Vellore
Citizens Forum’ and in a landmark judgement in 1996, the Supreme Court ordered shutting down
of tanneries here and ordered a pollution fine of Rs 10,000 to be paid by polluting industries. This
judgement also required the Central Government to establish an authority under Section 3(3) of
the Environment Protection Act of 1986, headed by a retired high court judge, to deal with the
situation created by the tanneries and other polluting industries. This authority was conferred wide
powers, including ordering closure or relocation of units if necessary.26
The Palar river is an important seasonal river that flows through north Tamil Nadu. There has
been large-scale sand mining from the river, mainly for the construction and glass industry. Even
when the river is dry, there are several springs which supply fresh water. However continued sand
mining will be a threat to the existence of these freshwater springs. The large-scale sand mining
in the Palar basin is being opposed by many panchayats,27 especially in and around Kanchipuram
town, as the mining is seen as being detrimental to availability of fresh water.

3.5. Other initiatives

Other community-based conservation examples include the Longwood Shola
near Ooty and Pambar Shola near Kodaikanal. At both these sites, the
local community understands the importance of the forest as a source
state chapter - tamil nadu

of water security, and is doing everything to prevent deforestation. The

determined efforts of the Vattakanal Conservation Trust here have not only
led to less pressure for fuelwood on the shola, but it has also taken up active
planting of shola species from the nursery that it has set up. The Longwood Shola
is protected by several villagers situated close to this reserved forest, driven by
the belief that this forest ensures the year-round flow of streams.
Another example is that of an initiative in Simson Industrial estate in Chennai.
There were earlier about 40 night herons here, in an area with about 200 trees. A
person called V. Guruswami convinced the managers of the site to protect it. Now
there are reportedly about 10,000 birds that roost and/or nest here.
650 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

4. Conclusions
4.1. Constraints and opportunities for community conservation
As seen above, both traditional and new forms of community-based conservation can be seen
in Tamil Nadu. This includes sacred groves and other forests, wetlands, and other ecosystems.
It also includes struggles against destructive land uses of these ecosystems, such as mining and
industrial pollution. There also seems to be a revival of conservation of agro-biodiversity and
organic farming, which has conservation potential. However, these initiatives face considerable
hurdles that will need to be tackled if community-based conservation is to become widespread and
be scaled up.
One of the biggest constraints to community-based conservation is posed by the degree of
industrialization and urbanization across Tamil Nadu. High degrees and intensities of conflict over
existing natural resources have lead to enormous ecological pressures. Most of the communities
are either part of the mainstream economy or dependent on it, due to comparatively high levels
of literacy and industrialisation. This reduces the intensity and desire among local communities to
participate in conservation of wild biodiversity.
Secondly, as in many other parts of India, much of what was common property is now under state
control. This leaves little incentive for local communities to protect their ecosystems, even though
they may depend on these areas directly or indirectly. Equity issues internal to communities also
continue to be hurdles; for instance, caste based politics appears to be a strong deterrent.
There are government schemes such as the TAP where funds are allotted for community
participation in restoration and protection of forests and watershed areas. The drawbacks of
such programmes are that they are externally funded, provide resources for a specified period of
time and are dependent on officials implementing the programme, with little attempt to devolve
decision-making to local institutions. On the other hand, sometimes such programmes may end
up either introducing or reinforcing the concept of conservation and the benefits derived from it
among local communities. They might also make the existing community more cohesive in order
to derive benefits, and even after the official programme is over the conservation effort may
continue (as is reported to have happened in the case of the ecodevelopment effort at Kalakkad
Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve). The fringe benefit of such programmes is that they build confidence
in people when they get to know more about the policies and schemes of the government, and are
put in touch with government, non-government and other agencies.
One of the largest spaces for community conservation in the state exists in the restoration and
management of wetlands and tanks. Some organisations have been working with local people to
motivate them to form tank-farmers associations, and have been lobbying with the government
both for allocation of funds for restoration of waterbodies as well as transferring ownership rights
over such resources back to local communities. A comparison of budgets reveals that community-
based tank management is cheaper in the long run for the government. An example of this is the
desalination of sea water (Naripayyur scheme) to supply water to about 30 villages. This scheme
incurred high cost in setting up infrastructure such as overhead tanks, the desalination plant with
high maintenance cost and the membrane that was imported and is now not working (a rough
estimate was about Rs. 3 crores or 30 million for a period of three years). On the other hand almost
every village has a tank whose one-time clean-up will not cost more than Rs 50000 to one lakh
and will ensure supply of water till the next desilting. According to Mr Karrupasami (member of
DHAN),28 the task of restoring forgotten management systems can also help unite and strengthen
the community. And it would support the revival and conservation of tank-based biodiversity.

Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank members of DHAN foundation, especially
Karruppusamy, P. Anand Kumar and Seenivasan. Ossie Fernandes, Jesu Ratinam
and others of CAN (Coastal Action Network) were also supportive in explaining
coastal issues, especially that of Pulicat Lake. Members of the Tamil Nadu Green
movement, especially Jayachandran, Michael Danino, and Bhojanam, helped in
understanding conservation issues in the Western Ghats. Sugato Dutta was
helpful in reviewing this paper. A special thanks to K.C. Bhushan for
supporting this research and documentation.

Shantha Bhushan is a member of Kalpavriksh Environmental Action

Group, Pune.
 Tamil Nadu 651

Endnotes
1
www.censusindia.net/t_00_003.html and www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Religiondata_2001.xls.
2
Dharampal, Panchayat Raj and India’s Polity (Goa, Other India Press, 1995).
3
Anil Agrawal and Sunita Narain (eds), Dying Wisdom (New Delhi, Centre for Science and Environment, 1997).
4
Dharampal, Panchayat Raj and India’s Polity. (As above)
5
Sir Thomas Munro abolished conservatorship, as he held that dictates of capital and market would regulate forest
exploitation. He was committed to what he construed as the ancient Indian tradition of personal government and
thought that state control of forests would provoke peasant resistance. The lack of conservancy system, combined
with the breakdown of community institutions caused by existing policies, led to increased rate of deforestation.
6
Mahesh Rangarajan, Wildlife History of India (New Delhi, Permanent Black, 2001).
7
Ramachandra Guha, Social Ecology (New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1994).
8
W.A. Rodgers and H.S. Panwar, Planning a Protected Area Network for India. 2 volumes (Dehradun, Wildlife
Institute of India, 1997).
9
Tamil Nadu Forest Department, ‘Tamil Nadu Afforestation Project: A Resume of Achievements.’ (Report by Tamil
Nadu Forest Department for 1997-2001, 2001).
10
Annamalai. Report on JFM in Tamil Nadu, www.iifm.org/databank/jfm/tnstatus.
11
Another positive spin-off was foreshore afforestation of tanks. In some districts of Tamil Nadu, afforestation done
under the social forestry project has provided favourable conditions. Ramanathapuram district (TN) and Tirunelveli
district (TN) are such examples. Species of Acacia were planted on the foreshore and sometimes in the tanks and this
has been beneficial for the birds. Examples include Chittarnagudi and Vettangudi sanctuaries.
12
Tamil Nadu Forest Department, ‘Tamil Nadu Afforestation Project’. (As above)
13
Agrawal and Narain, Dying Wisdom. (As above)
14
M. Amrithalingam, Sacred Groves of Tamil Nadu - A Survey (Chennai, CPR Environment Education Centre,
1998).
15
Amrithalingam, Sacred Groves. (As above)
16
Terracotta was used as a dedication to the restorative powers of the earth.
17
The Ayyanar, a terracotta figurine of a man astride a horse, is deified as the village watchman and mounted in
the local sacred grove.
18
Amrithalingam, Sacred Groves. (As above)
19
Bhavani Shankar, ‘Restoration of Sacred Groves in Tamil Nadu’, Nanditha Krishna and J. Prabhakaran (eds),
Ecological Traditions of Tamil Nadu (Chennai, CPR Environment Education Centre, 1997).
20
Agrawal and Narain, Dying Wisdom. (As above)
21
WWF – India, Directory of Wetlands (New Delhi, WWF India and Asian Wetlands Bureau, 1997).
22
Rangarajan, Wildlife History of India. (As above)
23
These were schemes for maximising revenue mainly from agricultural land, designed and introduced by Munro
when he was Governor of Madras. This scheme was designed to ensure maximum rent returns even in famine years.
There was a lot of debate within the company about the social and economic impact of deforestation, and therefore
of the security of the British regime.
24
state chapter - tamil nadu

Agarwal and Narain, Dying Wisdom. (As above)

25
www.dhan.org
26
Armin Rosencraz and Shyam Diwan, Environmental Law and Policy in India - Cases, Materials and Statutes (New
Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2000).
27
These panchayats are especially emboldened by, and are trying to use, the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the
Indian Constitution, which empowered local bodies to handle development and welfare activities.
28
Personal communication with Karuppasami, member of DHAN Foundation, Mudukulathor, in 2001.
 CCA/TN/CS1/Nellore/Pulicat/Wetland protection

Pulicat lake, Nellore

Background
Pulicat Lake is a well-known lagoon close to Chennai and also a legally notified bird sanctuary.
However, what is not so well known about this lake is the link of the livelihoods and traditions of
the local people with the lagoon ecosystem, and people’s struggles consequent efforts to save their
livelihoods, and thus the lagoon, from over-exploitation, pollution and developmental pressures.
This case study is a small effort to bring out the aspirations and struggles of the local fisherfolk,
which, if taken into account, could lead to long-term protection and conservation of the lake.
Pulicat is an extensive brackish-to-saline lagoon with marshes and a brackish swamp on the
north. This is the second largest saltwater lagoon in India and a Ramsar site (internationally
recognized wetland under the Ramsar Convention). Only 16 per cent of the lagoon is in Tamil Nadu
; the rest is in Andhra Pradesh. It is fed by the Araani River at the southern tip and the Kalangi
River from the north west. Buckingham canal, a navigation channel, passes through the lagoon.
On the eastern boundary of this lagoon is Shriharikota island, which separates the lagoon from
Bay of Bengal. The lagoon is shallow with large areas of mudflats and sandflats. In general, the
seawater enters the lagoon through the northern end near Shriharikota Island and flows back into
the Bay of Bengal through the southern end. The salinity is greatly affected by rains. There is a
sand-bar formation at the north end where the lagoon is separated from the sea, and this has to be
removed manually if the rains do not wash it away. The closure the of sand bar (either due to lack
of rain or massive sand deposition) leads to depletion of fish stock, as the lagoon acts as nursery
for the hatchlings. The lagoon is a delicate system and requires constant inflow of seawater and
gets adversely affected by sand deposition.
The Pulicat Lake is situated between 13°25’ and 13°55’ North, and 80°3’ and 80°19’ East. The
lake is about 45 km north of Chennai and can be reached by bus from Chennai. Pulicat Lake has
been a traditional fishing centre. This was a trading port for the Portugese and Dutch in the 16th
and 17th centuries. The process of soil erosion and siltation is believed to have started with the
Dutch over-exploiting the mangroves for commerce and trade.
Legally, part of the lake was notified as Pulicat Bird Sanctuary (Tamil Nadu) on 22 September
1980, and was finally declared a Sanctuary on 30 May 1990. This sanctuary is controlled by the FD
and managed by the DFO Nellore. There are patches within the lake where the ownership is not
clear. Pulicat Lake is also a CRZ-I area under the Coastal Regulation Zone rules of the Environment
Protection Act, 1980.
Pulicat Lake is located on the boundary of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. This case study
focuses on the efforts of local people in the 6000 ha on the Tamil Nadu side of the boundary.
The lagoon is known to support 160 species of fish, 25 species of polycheates, 12 species of
penaeid prawns, 29 species of crabs and 19 species of molluscs.1 It is also known to support
rich growth of algae (especially filamentous algae) and high populations of invertebrate fauna,
including annelids, coelenterates, molluscs, crustaceans and echinoderms.2 Pulicat is an important
habitat for a wide variety of resident and migratory waterfowl, notably pelicans, herons, storks,
flamingoes, ducks, shorebirds, gulls, terns and many species of raptors. Pulicat is known to be the
third most important wetland for migratory shorebirds along the eastern shore.
case studies - tamil nadu

The total human population in Pulicat Lake is around 35,000, spread

over 52 kuppams (settlements). Two-thirds of the settlements
are on the Tamil Nadu side. The majority of fishermen belong
to the traditional marine fishing caste called the pattanavars
or pattanathirs (literally meaning ‘belonging to a city’). The
others include dalits (scheduled castes) and tribals (irulas
and yennadis) who have moved to fishing from
agriculture. It is estimated that a total of about
12,370 fishermen live on full-time fishery in
the lake (6000 in AP and 6370 in Tamil Nadu).

652
 Tamil Nadu 653

Towards community conservation

Paadu is a traditional system of fishing, where a part of the lagoon is controlled and earmarked
for the exclusive fishing use of designated villages. This system is common to many coastal areas
of Tamil Nadu.
The highly productive southern sector of Pulicat Lagoon, close to Ennore and about 5 km from
the estuary (where the sea water and lagoon water meet), is controlled by fishermen from three
villages: Kottai Kuppam, Christian Kuppam and Andikuppam. The fishing grounds fall within a
radius of five kilometers from the mouth of the lake, with a salinity which is well maintained even
during low tides. According to the traditional fishermen, this is a caste-specific system.
Among the traditional fisherfolk there are different classes and they are more or less designated
as castes. The pattanavar (one who owns the village or who founded the village) is respected as
the traditional leader and his family becomes the ruling caste. The fisherfolk of the pattanavar
caste generally live at the southern end of the lake which does not usually dry up. Married men of
the pattanavar caste (above 15 years of age) are eligible to be members of the talekattu, which is
the village level organization of fishermen. The fisherman seeking membership should be skilled
and acceptable to the village community. As a member of the talekattu, he has to participate in
common tasks such as contributing towards litigation, temple repairs and festival expenses. This
designated caste is supposed to protect the mouth of the lake since it is the best fishing ground .
There are three paadu systems in the lagoon:
• Vadakku Paadu: This is a canal-like area of about 1.25 sq km on the northern side. This is the
most productive area and therefore the most intense fishing is done here.
• Moonthuri Paadu is about 2.5 sq km in area and is not as productive as Vadakku Paadu.
• Odai Paadu is the smallest and least productive paadu and has almost been abandoned.

Fisherfolk are strict about the kind of fishing equipment used. The boats usually used are ordinary
country rafts called nattupadagu (literally, country boats) The length of this plank-built boat ranges
from 6-8 metres, with a capacity of about two tonnes. A lot of fishing gears are used in Pulicat
Lake. Researchers have listed nine types of fishing gear: cast nets, gill nets, drag nets, shore-
seine, bag nets, stake nets, hook and line, vallikodi (lure fishing) and adappu (impoundment). The
most effective of these nets are sutru valai and padi valai (both kind of fishing nets).
The operation is done at night during low tide when shrimps migrate to sea. The tadukku (an
obstruction that functions as a barricade in the path of the mobile prawns and they consequently
get caught in the sutru valai). The operations of sutru valai are done from shore to shore, virtually
blocking the movement of prawn and thereby affecting the catch of downstream fishermen.
The padi valai is essentially a drag net, almost in the shape of a shore-seine, mainly used for
catching mullets and other species during neutral phases of the tide. The padi valai is a symbol
of affluence and not owned by many and its operation requires about 30 people at a time. The
padi valai is not used often as the fishing grounds have been altered by the 1984 cyclone.

Some of the rules and regulations followed include:

1. Each village carries out the fishing operations independently of the
other.
2. The paadu system for the sutru valai operates on a lottery system for
the eligible talekattu of the villages. Every paadu village knows the days
designated for the village for fishing in the fishing ground. The talekattu
case studies - tamil nadu

meet on certain auspicious days to draw lots for allocation of fishing grounds.
The most productive as well as the least productive villages are used and this
gives equitable access to all fishermen.
3. Fishing is carried out three days before and three days after the full moon and
new moon. This period has heightened tidal activity, which enables active movement
of prawns.
4. This system excludes new fisherfolk, Yannadi and Irula tribals and Muslims from
Jamilabad from fishing in these grounds.
5. Irulas and yannadis are allowed to use simple fishing gear to hunt crabs or
manually hunt crabs but are strictly prohibited from using plank-boats or fishing nets.
654 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

It seems difficult to accurately assess the total production of fishes and shrimps available in Pulicat
lake given the complexity of the system. One of the most serious threats to conservation of this
lagoon, according to local experts such as Sanjeev Raj, seems to be overfishing. There has been a
drastic dip in the income levels of the fishermen of Pulicat. This is attributed to high pollution levels
in the lake. The outlet of coolant water from Ennore Thermal power plant at elevated temperatures
has adversely affected aquatic life. The pollution caused by fly-ash from the Ennore plant has also
had a big impact on the water quality and therefore on the biodiversity of Pulicat lake.
The pressures and conflicts within the lake have led to establishment of a fishermen’s union
which is a union of 29 different fishermen’s societies from 20 different villages in Pulicat. This
union has a major role to play in sorting out conflicts, reducing tension and mobilising people to
act. Currently the paadu system is being extended to include the villages on the other side of the
sand bar. The sand-bar formation at the mouth of the lake happens quite often and hampers the
exchange of water between the sea and the lagoon. When the sand-bar formation is partial, then
the rains either wash it away or it could be manually removed. The failure of monsoons in 2000 led
to complete closure of the mouth of the lagoon and this led to rapid depletion of stock.
The exact details of the conflict resolution mechanisms were not available in the secondary
literature. The relevance of the paadu system to the current situation of depleted fish stock also
needs to be understood. There needs to be a better understanding of ‘overfishing’ in this context.
There were conflicting opinions on this system, ranging from accusations of fishermen overfishing
to pollution causing depletion of aquatic life and consequent loss of income. It is clear that the
paadu system of ensuring equitable use of the lake is under threat from overpopulation, depleting
stock and pollution caused by the thermal power plant. It is for this reason that we view the
sustained struggle against pollution as an attempt to conserve biodiversity, though livelihood
issues are also involved.

Opportunities and constraints

Conflicts due to displaced fishermen
Though the paadu system guarantees equitable access to the members of the pattanavar caste
over the lagoon, access to outside fishermen is strictly restricted, which does lead to conflicts,
which often turn violent. The settlements practicing paadu have experienced an influx of fishermen
displaced because of the Shriharikota space station and the Kalpakkam atomic power plant. The
Shriharikota Rocket Space Landing Station has been built on a small natural island in the midst
of Pulicat, displacing three fishing villages. The project also involved building a road with a bridge
right across the lagoon, which has had an impact on the ecosystem. The Kalpakkam atomic power
plant (75 km south of Chennai) displaced two villages of marine fisherfolk, who have been then
settled in Pulicat. In 1990, the Tamil Nadu government granted special fishing rights to the five
newly settled villages, thereby leading to a conflict with the local fisherfolk.
Between 1985 and 2000, about twelve fisherfolk died in such conflicts. Since there was recurrent
violence especially in fishing seasons (Oct-Dec), the paadu fisherfolk started calling for a ‘fisherfolk
leaders’ council’ in Pulicat lagoon. The role of this council is to resolve conflicts and ease tensions.
The council also ensures that the rule and regulations laid down by traditional leaders councils are
followed while fishing.
According to Rajashekharan, leader of the Fishermen’s Union, because of the paadu system,
conflicts are on the rise, and regulated fishing is under threat. The situation is further complicated
by pollution, which is threatening the very survival of the lagoon and thus the fishing community.
The lagoon fisherfolk are divided over the paadu issue. About 70 percent of the fisherfolk benefit
from this system and therefore support it, while those who do not are obviously against this system.

Struggle against pollution from thermal power project

North Chennai Thermal Power Station (NCTPS) was set up by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
(TNEB). This plant is located within CRZ-I; however clearance for this was granted prior to 1991
when CRZ came into existence. This plant draws 44 lakh litres of freshwater from Ennore creek
and releases hot coolant water into Buckingham canal and discharges about 3000 tonnes of toxic
fly-ash in the form of slurry every day. The release out of hot coolant water at temperatures of
about 40°C leads to oxygen depletion and death of aquatic life. The combination of coolant water
and fly-ash has had a serious impact on the livelihood of people by depleting fish populations.
In order to tackle this problem, the people of Pulicat tried to have a dialogue with the state
government, district collector, chief engineer NCTPS and others. As a result of these meetings, a
fact-finding committee was set up to investigate the pollution caused by this plant. One of the basic
 Tamil Nadu 655

questions that concerned the fisherfolk was whether they would be granted jobs if the pollution
continued, resulting in loss of livelihood. Nothing concrete emerged from these meetings with the
government and the pollution continued unabated. On 5 August 2000, fisherfolk from Pazhaverkadu
met the Chief Engineer regarding the intake of coolant water from Pulicat lake and continued release
of hot coolant water. The engineer claimed that the coolant water was being drawn from Ennore
creek and not from the lagoon. In response the fishermen decided that they would block the inlet of
coolant water to NCTPS. Besides there was a total strike from 6-11 August and no one did any fishing
for the next 15 days. A breakthrough was achieved as a result of this agitation. The NCTPS devised a
system of reusing the hot water that it releases, and it was no longer necessary to discharge hot water
into the lagoon. It is not clear if this system is efficient for the NCTPS and whether this will continue.

Struggle against petrochemical park

Kattupalli island is a narrow longitudinal island separated from the mainland by the backwaters
extending from the Pulicat lake. The island is bordered by the Bay of Bengal on the east,
Buckingham canal on the west, Pulicat Lake on the north and Ennore creek on the south. The
total area of this island is about 18 sq km, and it supports a human population of about 2250
families. The island has a rich biodiversity of vegetation, especially mangroves, freshwater and
brackishwater flora and fauna, and medicinal plants. The Tamil Nadu Industrial Development
Corporation (TIDCO) had planned to establish a Rs 6000 crore petrochemical complex on this
island with the idea that the Ennore port would be used for transporting the products. TIDCO went
ahead with the acquisition of land of 2,900 ha even before the public hearing under Environment
Impact Assessment (EIA) rules was held. The state government had directed the district collector
to invoke Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, which is an emergency provision. They sought
to acquire farmlands, wetlands, salt-pan areas, and private and peramboke (wasteland) land.
The people of Kattupalli and Pulicat were vehemently opposed to this—they knew the impact
that this project would have and therefore decided to oppose it. The local community approached
Coastal Action network (CAN) for help in this matter. CAN is a state-level federation of people’s
organizations, environmental organizations, activists, consumer action groups, advocates, etc.
CAN filed a writ petition (WP 7613 of 2000) asking to quash the GOMS 85 dated 21/3/1997 issued
by the Industries Department and for a direction not to set up the petrochemical park. On 3 May
2000 a public hearing was held at the Tiruvallur Collectorate. A large number of fishermen from
Pulicat and Kattupalli participated and clearly expressed their opposition to this TIDCO project.

This case study has been contributed by Shantha Bhushan of Kalpavriksh in 2002. It is based
on a day-long field trip to Pulicat lake, Ennore Thermal Power Plant and Kattupalli island;
detailed conversations with the union leader of the Fishermen’s Union and a secondary literature
review.

For more details contact:

Shantha Bhushan
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa,
908, Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411016, Maharashtra
Ph: 020-25654239
E-mail: shantha.s.bhushan@gmail.com

Rajashekhar
case studies - tamil nadu

Joint Secretary Pulicat Coastal Fishermen’s Association

Kottaikuppam, Pulicat Post, Ponneri Taluk
Nellore District, Tamil Nadu - 601205
Endnotes
1
D. Panini, ‘Addressing livelihood issues in conservation-oriented projects: Case study of Pulicat Lake’ in R. Jeffrey
and B.Vira, (eds), Conflict and Cooperation in Participatory Natural Resource Management (London and New York,
Palgrave, 2001).
2
World Wide Fund for Nature, Directory of Wetlands of India (Delhi, WWF, 1996).
 CCA/TN/CS2/Nilgiris/Longwood Shola/Forest protection

Longwood Shola, Nilgiris

Background
Longwood is a typical shola that is found in the
higher ranges of the Western Ghats. The sholas
are patches of evergreen tropical rainforests in
the valleys of the southern end of the Western
Ghats, surrounded by natural grasslands. Sholas
are rich forests with two or three wood strata, and
are usually rich in epiphytes like moss, orchids
and ferns. The herbaceous cover on the ground
varies according to soil moisture. The ground is
usually covered with high humus content and leaf
litter. Their expanse is restricted by the extreme
climatic conditions of frost in the morning and
strong sun during the day. There is an intense
competition for sunlight among the trees in the
sholas, and trees take a long time to mature. A typical shola forest (photo from Kerala)
Sholas are like sponges that retain moisture and Photo: Ashish Kothari
provide a continuous source of water.
Longwood is located in the Nilgiri mountains. It is a biodiversity hotspot and believed to be the
richest in amphibian diversity in Asia. The conservation effort of the local people at Longwood
Shola can best be understood in the context of the rapid rate of forest destruction that is taking
place though most of the Nilgiris, mainly for extraction for fuelwood or conversion into plantations.
The Nilgiris were among the most favoured hill stations of the European settlers who came here
150 years ago. The early settlers cleared large patches of natural vegetation for planting tea,
coffee and cinchona. Destruction was so evident that towards the end of the 19th century concern
were being raised about saving the sholas and other forests in the Nilgiris. Thus, large areas of
forest land were reserved by the government under the Madras Forest Act of 1882. As early as
1905, some people were concerned with the degradation of forests and urged local people not
to convert natural forests to plantations. In particular an Englishman, Mr. Bracks, had tried to
organize people against deforestation. His initiative did raise awareness but the conversion to
plantations continued. In the latter half of the 20th century, afforestation attempts were made by
the FD by planting nilgiri and wattle to meet fuelwood needs.
Longwood Shola is located near Kothagiri town (about 50 km from Coimbatore), located at an
elevated level close to the junction of Eastern and Western Ghats. This town is easily accessible by
bus from Coimbatore town. Legally a Reserved Forest, this small shola of 116 ha is administratively
under the control of the FD.
Longwood Shola is the source of three perennial streams with a few seasonal ones. Two of the
main streams join in the central swamp and the third joins them in a pond below an old nursery.
Longwood Shola has many endemic species of flora and fauna.

Towards community conservation

The forests in and around Longwood Shola have been getting degraded, leading to problems such
case studies - tamil nadu

as water depletion and erosion. The main reasons for this degradation have been cutting of trees
for fuelwood and the timber market. The women and children would come here to cut fuelwood and
the men would cut the bigger trees, which were then sold at local timber market. There were and
perhaps are still several ‘illegal’ firewood dealers in Kothagiri town and adjoining areas.
What is now a community effort at preserving the shola started as an individual’s determined
effort to protect this rich patch of forest. In the early 1980s, Michel Danino (a French national), a
researcher at the Mother’s Institute of Research, started to create awareness about the need to
protect this shola. He especially tried to get the forest department to protect this reserved forest,
which is an important source of water for the residents of the adjoining area. In 1984, he sent a
petition to the DFO (Udhagamandalam) regarding the rapid deforestation that was taking place.
The forest department officials did provide help at this point, but it was not a sustained effort at
656
 Tamil Nadu 657

prevention of tree cutting. Gradually, in the 1990s, many individuals from the villages around the
shola started taking an effort in creating awareness among the local people. They also started
patrolling the shola on a regular basis. They would take turns in patrolling and made sure that
there was somebody patrolling everyday. This patrolling involved sometimes confrontation with
men and women who came for fuelwood or timber. Many times the tree-cutters ran away on
seeing the patrollers. By 1997, the effort put in by this group of individuals had gained recognition.
The group included nearly 40 people, who would take turns to patrol regularly. There were some
determined and earnest members who would patrol everyday, while there were some who would
come once a month to patrol. This informal but regular patrolling continues even today.
Apart from controlling illicit felling, these individuals also prevented encroachments, including
encroachments for religious purposes. Finally a chain-link fence was erected around the shola to
prevent trespass. In 1998, the new DFO Doraiswamy started taking interest in the shola. Since
there were so many individuals trying to protect it, the forest department felt that formation of an
officially recognized committee could institutionalize their efforts. In May 1998, a Longwood Shola
Watchdog Committee (LSWC) was formed. It comprised Danino, Balamurugan (headmaster), Raju
(mathematics teacher and social worker), and Michael Ezeikel (music teacher). The members of
LSWC were chosen at a meeting where forest department officials and some members of the local
community were present.
The primary responsibility of the LSWC is to prevent tree cutting and report offences to the forest
department. On some occasions the FD has actually levied fines from the tresspassers, but usually
the fact of being caught has itself served as a deterrent and tree cutting has reduced. The LSWC
has also been trying to find alternative sources of fuel so that fuelwood pressure comes down.
They have been lobbying for fuelwood depots to be opened so that the long-time residents as well
the new settlers have an official source of fuel.
The LSWC has been conducting regular awareness camps in nearby villages, and also seminars
for teachers and headmasters. They also have eco-awareness camps at the interpretation centre
constructed at the entrance (close to Kerbetta village) of the shola. This was financed by the forest
department and several interested individuals helped. They also hold regular nature camps for
children, giving the children actual field experience apart from lectures. The children also help in
cleaning of the shola. In 1998, the LSWC printed about 4000 pamphlets describing the importance
of the shola and distributed this to all the villagers. They also went door to door to about 700
houses in nearby settlements and villages to create awareness about Longwood Shola and its role
in protecting their water supply. This campaigning has had an impact and reportedly villagers are
more aware of the saving the shola for their water.
The LSWC has no legal powers and prosecution of offenders is done by the forest department.
The role of the LSWC is purely in patrolling, informing the FD of any problems that might adversely
affect the shola, and creating awareness. For the LSWC, the main motives for protecting the shola
are water and biodiversity.
The LSWC has been maintaining the chain-link fence. They undertake repairs and many times
put in their own money as the FD funds are released only at the end of the year.

Impacts of conservation
Within a year from the time that LSWC was formed, the incidents of illicit tree felling have
reduced by 90 per cent. In addition, there has been spontaneous regeneration of shola species in
the open and degraded areas within the shola.
Often picnickers used to visit the shola. Often groups of people would come here and litter the
place and also scare the animals. Large amounts of plastic packaging could be seen strewn in the
forest. LSWC has been able to control these harmful activities of the tourists to a great extent.
case studies - tamil nadu

As has been mentioned above, Longwood Shola is the water-catchment area for several streams
in the area. Protection of this shola has ensured drinking water to the surrounding villages of
Kerbetta, Hosatti, Aaravenu, Jackaranai and 16 associated hamlets. There are many villages
situated far away which also benefit from the streams originating at Longwood Shola.
This initiative also encouraged the forest department to focus more actively on conservation of sholas
in the area. To this end, they have created nurseries at Bandishola, Aramby and Thalaikundah.

Constraints and opportunities

The FD has a budget allocation for maintenance of the fence and for conducting camps for
children, teachers, etc. Usually these funds are released at the end of the financial year. By this
658 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

time the members of LSWC carry out the required work by contributing personal funds. However,
recovering their money from the FD means a long follow-up and running around.
This initiative has evolved slowly, starting with one individual’s attempt at conservation. The
effort of the concerned people has been purely voluntary and there is no commitment by these
individuals to any particular group/organization. Also, the entire community is not involved in this
conservation attempt. The lack of structure is both the strength and weakness of this initiative.
Many people recognize that they need to protect this shola as a watersource, and implicitly
support this conservation initiative. Neither the constitution nor the mandate of this group (the
constitution keeps changing) has the explicit consensus of all the people living around Longwood
Shola in the form of any referendum. At the same time there has been no opposition to the effort
put in by this group.
There are many tea factory workers in this area who take fuelwood from Longwood Shola, as
they have no other cheap means of fuel. With the tea market slump, there has been more pressure
on the forests, as the workers who had switched to gas/kerosene are no longer able to afford gas
cylinders. There are also recent settlers (such as refugees from Sri Lanka, migrant workers) who
have put added pressure on this fragile forest. The LSWC has been lobbying for a fuel depot to
meet the fuelwood needs of the people of this area but the Forest department has not been able
to arrange this.
The LSWC has no authority to prosecute offenders and therefore the cooperation of the FD is crucial.
The relationship between LSWC and the ranger determines whether the ranger will actually register
the complaints. Recently there have been reports of conflict between the ranger and some members.
There has been a sharp increase in the crow population, possibly because of the increased human
population and garbage in the surrounding area. The crows are reportedly affecting the population
of other birds, as they feed on them. They have even been seen chasing raptors like eagles.
The second problem has been that of an aggressive weed called orange cestrum, originally
from South America. It is a fast-growing shrub that can reach a height of about 6-8 m and with a
girth of 1 m, with clusters of orange trumpet-like flowers and spherical creamy seeds. The plant
is identifiable by the bad odour that its crushed leaves produce. This weed is difficult to eradicate
and since it grows about 20 times faster than shola species, it suppresses the regeneration of other
saplings. The LSWC and other individuals have been manually removing these weeds, often with
help from students and other volunteers.

This case study has been contributed by Shantha Bushan, member, Kalpavriksh, in 2002.
The author is deeply grateful to Coastal Action Network (Ossie Fernandes, Jesu Ratinam and
others), DHAN Foundation (Seenivasan, P. Anand Kumar and Karrupusamy) Tamil Nadu Green
Movement (Jayachandran), and individuals such as Michael Danino and Bhojanam who took
time out to help us understand the issues in community-based management in Tamil Nadu.

For more details contact:1

Shantha Bhushan
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa,
908, Deccan Gymkhana, Pune 411016, Maharashtra
Ph: 020-25654239
E-mail: shantha.s.bhushan@gmail.com

K. Senthil Prasad
Secretary, KWEA,
5/112, Jackanarai Aravenu,
PO Kotagiri, Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu.
Telephone: 04266-371345

Endnotes
1
For more details on the initiative, also see Roy Lajapathi, ‘Treasure of the shola’, The Hindu, 25 March 2000; D.
Radhakrishnan, ‘Infusing new life into the Nilgiri sholas’, The Hindu, 3 July 1999; Harry Miller, ‘Halt desertification of
the Nilgiris’, Indian Express, 26 October 1984; Report of the Longwood Shola Watchdog Committee, 2001.
 CCA/TN/CS3/Palni Hills/Pambar Shola/Forest protection

Pambar Shola, Palni Hills

Background
Pambar Shola is near Kodaikanal town, at an altitude of 2000 ft. The village of Vatakkanal,
adjoining the shola, can be reached easily from Kodaikanal, which is a tourist destination in the
Palni hills. The village of Vatakkanal has been taking a keen interest in the conservation of Pambar
shola and is also attempting to restore the adjoining degraded areas. Rampant felling for fuelwood
and timber, cattle grazing, potato farming, and soil erosion due to Ravine Falls being designated a
tourist spot had led to steady degradation of Pambar shola. Now this degradation has been arrested
and restoration of the shola and adjoining areas is underway. Legally the shola is a reserved forest
and covers an area of about 100 ha.
The village of Vattakanal stretches from Kodaikanal lake to Pillar Rocks and extends down to
Shembaganur in the north-east. The extensive grasslands surrounding the shola stretch towards
Vellegevi in the mid hills. This village came into existence about 150–200 years ago when the
British decided to explore these hills. Many of the villagers originally came here
as labourers or as workers in the convents and churches that were established
around Kodaikanal. Presently, the major sources of income include plying taxi
and auto services and letting out rooms to tourists. Villagers also tried potato
cultivation and then stopped it as it was not profitable and caused soil erosion.
Ecologically this area is an endemic hotspot for plants and is extremely rich in
birdlife. The Nilgiri wood pigeon, Nilgiri flycatcher, white-bellied shortwing, Verditar
flycatcher, black and orange flycatcher found in and around Pambar Shola are
included in the Red Data list.1 There are eight species of plants that are endemic and
are found only in this shola. The grassland slopes between Pambar and Shembaganur
sholas have been declared as a Kurinji Reserve.

Towards community conservation

R.W. Stewart and Tanya Balcar, an English couple, came to Vattakanal and settled here in 1985.
When they settled here primarily for the ‘majestic beauty’ of village and the sholas, they realized
that the sholas were getting denuded fast as firewood cut from the shola was available at Rs 6 per
bundle. They decided to try and stop the degradation and help in the regeneration of the shola
and the surrounding areas. They started experimenting with seed collection and growing saplings
of shola species. In their effort they were helped by Jean Pouyet of Auroville. Thus the Vatakkanal
shola tree nursery was started in 1989; now this has saplings of about 250 tree species. They
realized that apart from fuelwood collection and timber extraction, potato cropping and free-
ranging cattle were causing extensive degradation and soil erosion in the shola.
Stewart and Tanya began discussions with the local people about the problems facing the shola.
It emerged that potato cultivation was not only bad for the soil but was also unprofitable, and
hence people decided to explore an alternative. Discussions were also held with cattle-owning
families. A local milkman, Bilavendran, helped in compiling a socio-economic database of the
village. After many discussions, it was decided that the cattle-owning families would either practice
stall-feeding or have specified patches where cattle could graze. This helped reduce soil erosion.
case studies - tamil nadu

By 1990, the shola tree nursery had become popular and saplings of all kinds (timber, fuelwood,
shola and fruit) were taken from here and planted by the villagers. The villagers started planting
fast-growing species as fences so that these could be used as fuelwood. Villagers made a conscious
decision not to cut slow-growing shola species for fuelwood.
Tanya and Stewart realized that conservation and development of the community go hand in
hand. They developed a strategy which would ensure economic growth of the villagers while
ensuring conservation of the shola.
One of the key tools used to generate awareness about the degradation of the shola was an
audio-visual presentation to the villagers. Since this village had no electricity, a generator was
hired (a TV and video player were also hired) for a Tamil programme on sholas. This seems to have
brought a dramatic change in the attitude of the villagers toward conservation of the shola.
659
660 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

In 1992, a massive tree plantation was done by the villagers and the forest department. The
plantation was done in areas that were destroyed in a fire in 1989. However, along with the shola
species, exotics such as nilgiri, pine and wattle were also planted.
The youth of the village started taking active interest in plantation and protection of the shola.
There are instances where villagers have gone way beyond their capacities to conserve the shola:
e.g., a youth shut down his traditional bakery after turning a conservationist. The bakery consumed
a large amount of fuelwood which was obtained from the shola. With financial help from a family
in New Zealand, the youth of the village were also able to take up plantations along the roads.
From the savings of the work on saplings, the youth were able to go on an environment trip to
the lower Nilgiris. During their trip they realized that they had to register as an organization to get
any funding for conservation- and community-related work. This group was registered as VOYCE
(Vattakanal Organisation for Youth Community and Environment) in 1994. The group established
its presence and made sure that tree cutting in the shola was not done either by villagers or
outside gangs.

Activities of VOYCE
• Regular and periodic cleaning of the area. This has resulted in drastic reduction of garbage inside
the shola.
• Encouraging cultivation and multiplication of highly endangered plants including ferns, herbs,
shrubs and trees. This is done by giving saplings to different people and institutions.
• Planting saplings in the degraded fringe areas with the help of the FD.
• Campaigning against illegal logging in the mid hills.
• Defending village watersources from developers.
• Working on relocation and recycling of waste from Kodaikanal.
The most active among the VOYCE members are John and Munniyandi. The VOYCE building was
built through community labour and now has a small restaurant and eco-shop, which sells soaps
and other items made by the village women’s groups. It is a key meeting place for the villagers
and serves as an information centre on environmental issues.
The profits from the sale of plants at the shola tree nursery go to VOYCE. Alchemilla indica, a
member of the rose family, was found in Pambar shola in the early 20th century and then almost
disappeared. Now the specimens of this plant are multiplying and will probably grow well again in
their original habitat. Psydrax ficiformis and Elaeocarpus blascoi, two tree species listed as ‘extinct
or almost extinct’, were found here and are now being multiplied in the nursery. Genera Hova and
Sonerita (which have only one species in that genus) and species of Plectranthus and Phyllanthus
have also been successfully grown in the nursery. Crotalalaria beddomeana (a shrub) has also
been propagated and planted extensively in and around Vatakkanal village.
None of the people involved with the initiative have a scientific background, yet through this
close association with the shola they have now developed deep understanding of the ecosystem
and its character. For instance, they have learnt that in a plantation shola species have a tendency
to invade the exotic species (which are used to provide cover from the sun). They have realized
that where shola invasion is strong, the succession should be allowed to proceed and encouraged
by selective weeding and species enrichment. Regarding removal of wattle, it was felt that manual
weeding and ring barking at the base of fertile mother trees would speed up removal, and also that
the cut material should be burnt or removed lest it act as cover for invasive species.

Impacts of conservation
In addition to the flora, the village has provided sanctuary to a family of gaur,
which has increased to more than 13 in number. Because of the efforts of the
youth, the garbage from the shola has considerably reduced.

Constraints and opportunities

The FD erected a fence around the shola. The fencing was necessitated partly by
the heavy influx of the tourists into the shola, which is an extremely beautiful place
with its many waterfalls. This fencing has however caused resentment amongst
the villagers, as it goes against the ‘social fencing ‘ practiced by the villagers.
 Tamil Nadu 661

Planting in degraded areas belonging to the FD requires permission, and sometimes this causes
conflict between the people and the FD.
A fire in 1998 under the Pond thermometer factory on the steep slopes of Pambar ravine led to
seeding of exotic species (encouraged by the opened canopy), particularly acacia and surai, and
now dense patches of these seedlings are well established.
Considering the Palni area as a whole, it is important to restore the grassland in the upper hills.
Vast plantations of exotic species such as wattle, eucalyptus and pine and weeds such as Ageratum
pose a threat to the habitat restoration of this area.
Tourism is a major threat to the shola. Waste washed down the Pambar stream due to large
number of tourists coming to Ravine Falls has a detrimental impact on the stream and the shola.
What seems to be demoralizing the villagers of Vatakkanal is that while part of the reserved forest
is open to busloads of tourists who litter the place and go away, people who have been protecting
the shola have no rights in this area.

This case study has been contributed by Shantha Bhushan, Kalpavriksh, in 2002. The case
study is largely based on: Bob Stewart and Tanya Balcar, ‘Pambar Shola – a success story in
conservation’ in Shola, Anglade Institute of Natural History. Issues 17 (1996), 20 (1997), 22
(1998), 25 (2000). The author is grateful to Tanya, Stewart, Munniyandi and John, members of
VOYCE, for their help during the visit to the village, and for sharing their views and insights.

For more details contact:

Shantha Bhushan
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa,
908, Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411016, Maharashtra
Ph: 020-25654239
E-mail: shantha.s.bhushan@gmail.com

VOYCE
P.O. Box No.109
12/110 Vattakanal Kodaikanal
Dindigul - 624109.
Tamil Nadu

Endnotes
1
IUCN listing of threatened species.
case studies - tamil nadu
 CCA/TN/CS4/Ramanathapuram/Chittarangudi/Heronry

Chittarangudi tank, Ramanathapuram

Background
Chittarangudi is a small village located 8 km from Muthukulathoor town in Ramanathapuram
district. Chittarangudi tank, a traditional tank, is situated on the northern side of this village. About
4 km in length and about 2.5 km in breadth, Chittarangudi tank is an important heronry. There
are several other tanks around Chittarangudi. Vettangudi and Kanjirkulam bird sanctuaries are
two other important ones from the point of view of bird conservation. This area has experienced
a severe drought in 2000 and 2001 and the number of birds coming to these tanks has therefore
decreased.
Traditionally, Chittarangudi villagers have treated birds like children, as they have realised the
importance of bird droppings in agriculture and thus their economy. Sentiments associated with
the birds cut across all class and caste barriers in the village. The importance of the tank in the
lives of the villagers can be gauged from the fact that they explain their history mostly in relation
to the tank.
In earlier times there were nearly twelve castes in the village: thevars, konars, pallars, vellalars
(pillai), sakkiliars, chettiyar, brahmins, Muslims, asariyars, poosaris, vannars (washermen), and
ambattayars (barbers). Now the Muslims, brahmins and chettiyars have completely left the village.
Among the nine castes that live in the village presently, Kondayan Kottai Thevars are in a majority,
with nearly 55 families. Most of them are engaged in agriculture; some of them own cattle as well.
The four servayar families are in a position of authority here. The village heads have been mostly
from this community and even now the panchayat president and the society president belong to
this community.
The next most important caste in the village is Konar, with about 25 Konar families in the village.
Most of them own cattle and also practice agriculture. The Pallar community also has about 25
families in the village, who are engaged in agriculture and cutting of Prosopis juliflora. The sakkiliar
community comprises mostly of labourers who are engaged in the cutting of juliflora. However,
there is unity among all castes and socially the entire village stands as a single unit. The people
have good relations with each other and the Chittarangudi tank seems to be a common factor that
binds them all.
Seasonal agriculture is the main source of livelihood in the village. Being located in a rain shadow
zone, this area receives very little rainfall. Rain is received from September to November (north-
east monsoon) when the tank also fills up. Paddy is grown in the wetland and chillies in the dry
lands. In the off-season the land is left fallow. During the dry season people grow some vegetables
in the dry tank bed (each family has occupied some land in the tank). Till the 1980s several crops
were grown in the dry areas of the tank. Around that time the FD planted acacia and disallowed
the villagers from using the tank.
The major source of income for the village is charcoal-making from Prosopis juliflora. In the dry
lands Prosopis grows naturally and is cut every 3 years. Normally an acre of land produces 5-20
tonnes of charcoal and fetches about Rs 3000 per ton. People also produce charcoal
from their own fields; sometimes the land is leased for Rs 3000-5000 per acre
for charcoal production. Due to a long drought and limited natural resources,
there has been an increased migration to nearby towns and big cities.
case studies - tamil nadu

Politically, the village is divided between two major political parties in Tamil
Nadu—the DMK and the AIADMK. Political positions and loyalties are stronger than
the caste differentiation in the village. If at all there are clashes or conflicts in the
village they are largely party politics-based. Divided political loyalties have ensured
that the village lacks most infrastructure facilities, as the proposals from one group are
shot down by the other.
Traditionally, the village has been administered by a village committee. This committee
includes 8 to 10 members from all the communities in the village. The functions of the
committee include:
1. To store the water in the tank and pond and to regulate the supply of water.
662
 Tamil Nadu 663

2. To maintain the tank.

3. To collect taxes from the villagers.
4. To organise village festivals.
5. To solve disputes and conflicts within the village.
6. To solve disputes with other villages.
7. To maintain the temples.
8. To protect the village from thieves and strangers.
9. To act as a mediator with the government.
This traditional system functioned well in the past but its efficiency has gone down in the recent
times mainly after the introduction of the official Panchayati Raj1 system of administration.
The present official system of administration in the village is the panchayat. The panchayat
comprises three villages: Chittirangudi, Erachikulam, and Veppangulam colony. In Chittarangudi,
though, even today the actual power of authority of the village is with the village committee. The
panchayat only acts as an executor of government schemes.
Another important administrative unit is the District Forest Office (DFO) of the forest department
(FD), which came to the village in 1979. The FD has planted Acacia sp. around the tank and in the
dry parts of the tank under the Social Forestry Scheme. This plantation is maintained by the FD for
the birds that come during the season.

Towards community conservation

Chittarangudi tank is the most important asset for the livelihood of the village. In 1800 a canal
from the Ragunatha Kaveri river was linked to supply water to the tank. The tank has a total water-
spread area of about 7 sq km and has an ayacut (irrigated area under a tank) of 350 acres, which
consists of 54 ayacutdars (the beneficiaries of an ayacut). There are 5 sluices, all of them in the
southern side of the tank. The bund height is about 4-5 ft on the southern side, while it is only
about 1-1.5 ft on the northern side. The tank at its full capacity irrigates nearly 600 acres. The tank
gets water only during the rainy season and dries up by the end of February.
In 1920, the neerkatti (one who irrigates water to the fields) system of water distribution was
introduced to the village by the village committee. Under this system, the committee appointed
two persons for distributing water to different fields in the village. Initially they were paid half or
one anna for their work, which has now risen to Rs 30-50 per day. This is paid from the village
fund. The village committee collects 10 rupees per acre of irrigated land from each farmer. The
job of the neerkatti is to see which land needs water and to irrigate it without any bias. There are
different sluices in the tank to irrigate different sizes of land.
The neerkatti after discussing with the committee and the villagers looking after the level of the
water in the tank has to irrigate the land according to the wish of the village and the committee.
During times of scarcity, there are more people to guard the sluice gates and a rationing system
of water sharing is followed. Anybody caught stealing water is fined heavily by the village
committee.
Chittarangudi attracts a large number of waterbirds, which roost here in the monsoons, and
is hence referred to as Chittarangudi heronry. For the birds to continue to visit a waterbody, it
is important to have an assured food supply and good cover for nesting. A heronry needs other
waterbodies in the vicinity as well to provide food to the birds. Chittarangudi has many tanks in its
case studies - tamil nadu

vicinity, including Vettangudi and Kanjirkolam, which are also legally notified bird sanctuaries. The
other small tanks in this region have now gone dry because of mismanagement. In recent times,
however, interests in tank management and upkeep has revived. Birds visiting Chittarangudi
include storks, ibises, herons, egrets, cormorants and several other migratory birds. Chittarangudi
is very safe for the birds as there is practically no poaching or stealing of eggs. The canopy cover
in the surrounding area is good and there is adequate food, as fishing is not allowed in the tank.
The villagers have great love for the birds and are committed to safeguarding them. The following
steps have been taken by the villagers to ensure safe and favourable habitat to the birds:
1. Villagers do not burst crackers during Diwali (which falls in the month of November) as they feel it
would frighten the birds during the nesting season (which is around October and November).
664 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

2. Many other tanks have been leased out by the village panchayat for fishing. This does not
happen here as it would disturb the birds and would affect their food consumption.
3. The eggs of the birds are not collected by the people (in some other heronries close by, the local
villagers take away eggs by bagloads). The villagers neither hunt the birds nor allow anybody
else to hunt.
4. The villagers do wish to cultivate a second crop in February but the water in the tank is usually
not enough for irrigation, and they leave it for the birds. It is possible that lack of consensus of
how to share the water for the second crop might result in not using it for cultivation.
5. One of the important functions of the village committee is to safeguard the birds; in this task
it is supported by the entire village. The villagers quote an incident: ‘Some strangers walked
into the tank one night to steal some birds. Then some of the birds flew over to the village and
made a big noise. The villagers ran with some weapons to stop the strangers; in the struggle
one of the villagers was very badly hurt and was admitted to the hospital.’ This is to indicate
the importance placed by the villagers on their winged seasonal guests.

Constraints and opportunities

Constraints
1. Ever since the plantation of acacia trees around the tank by the forest department, the villagers
are not allowed to use the dry tank bed for vegetable cultivation. This has caused resentment
among the villagers, as vegetable cultivation is an important source of supplementary income.
2. After the declaration of the sanctuary, cutting of karavel trees for fuelwood was banned. This
has further intensified the conflict between the FD and the people.
3. Excessive silt in the tank has reduced the storage capacity. Lack of regular desiltation leads to
inadequate water supply for irrigation. Also the water table in the village has dropped because
of a long drought. This has had serious impact on the economy of the village, as agriculture
is the primary source of livelihood and the tank is the main source of irrigation. Management
of the tank and regular desilting was a responsibility of the village committee in the past. The
forest department, which is currently in charge of tank management, has (for several reasons)
not been able to manage the tank effectively. One of the reasons cited is that management of
Chittarangudi sanctuary is low on priority in the FD’s allocation of funds, and even when funds
are allocated they usually come at the end of the financial year and not when money is required.
This seems to have had an impact on the nesting birds as well; according to the villagers, the
bird population in the monsoon of 2000 was much less than in previous years.

Threats
1. The number of trees in and around the tank has gone up (mainly Acacia nilotica) but canopy
cover has gone down, and many of the old trees are dying because of age (and excess bird
droppings on the leaves of the trees). This will have an impact on the nesting birds in the
heronry.
2. The nature of association between the villagers and the tank is changing. There is increased
out-migration of young people and thus agriculture may not be the primary source of livelihood
for the village anymore. The reduced dependence on the tank may have negative impact on the
heronry.

Conclusion
Chittarangudi sanctuary presents a strong case for joint tank management. It is strongly felt that
given the tradition of the villagers protecting the birds and the fact that they depend on the tank
for their livelihood, joint tank management would help in protection of the heronry. A management
strategy can be worked out jointly by the forest department, villagers and NGOs working in the
field of community-based tank management.
Tourism as a source of revenue is a distinct possibility. The people here take great pride in the
tank and the birds that it attracts. The infrastructure is very poor and at the best of times there
 Tamil Nadu 665

is only a single daily bus trip from Mudukulathur to this village. There is a watchtower, which is
not in good condition and needs repair. Yet eco-tourism, if carried out with social and ecological
sensitivity, can provide revenue and incentive for conservation.

This case study has been contributed by Shantha Bhushan, member, Kalpavriksh, in 2002.
The primary research for the case study was done by P. Anand Kumar from DHAN Foundation,
Madurai. Mr Karruppsami and his colleagues from the Muddukulathur office of DHAN contributed
by providing a complete picture of tank restoration in Ramanathapuram district. DHAN
Foundation was also very helpful in arranging the field visit and establishing contact with the
villagers.

For more details please contact:

Shantha Bhushan
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa,
908, Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411016, Maharashtra
Ph: 020-25654239
E-mail: shantha.s.bhushan@gmail.com

DHAN Foundation
18, Pillaiyar Koil Street
S.S. Colony, Madurai - 625 016.
Tamil Nadu
Ph: 0452-2610805
Email: dhan@md3.vsnl.net.in

Endnotes
1
Under the current system, the first unit of administration is the panchayat, the village executive council, constituted
of the elected members of the villages which fall under the panchayat. The panchayat system does not take into
account the existing traditional systems of administration in a village.

case studies - tamil nadu

 CCA/TN/CS5/Tirunelveli/Koondakulam/Heronry

Koondakulam, Tirunelveli
Background
The village of Koondakulam is a site
where painted storks, known to the
villagers as sangulavlai narai, come
to breed and have been protected by
the villagers for more than 200 years.
Koondakulam village is located in the
Tiruneveli district in Tamil Nadu. The
population of the village is around
9000, with most of the people being
agriculturists. The villagers are mostly
vegetarian. Their avian visitors include
painted storks, spot-billed pelicans,
egrets, Eurasian spoonbills, black-
crowned night herons and flamingoes.
These birds arrive in November- Painted storks roosting at Koondakulam
December every year and their nesting Photo: S. Subramanya
homes are in almost every neem and
tamarind tree in the village. At times they are even found on the low-slung prosopis trees. All the
species of birds that come here can be easily spotted in the village except for the grey herons and
the spoonbills which home on the trees on the farther side of Koondakulam tank. Hundreds of grey
pelicans, spoonbills and darter birds nest on Acacia nilotica trees on the Koondakulam lakeside.

Towards community conservation

The 129 ha Koondakulam lake gives its name to the village, as kulam means a lake in Tamil.
Koondakulam receives water from the Manimuthar canal and lies to the western side of the
village. This lake and neighbouring waterbodies like Kandankulam, Ilamalkulam, Sungulam and
Vijayanarayanam lake are brimming with fish and other small aquatic life after the monsoons and
serve as feeding ground for waterfowl. Pate, a former Collector of Tirunelveli, has recorded in the
District Gazetteer in 1914 that pelicans fed regularly in the Vijayanaranyanam Lake.
The villagers consider these birds as harbingers of rain, prosperity and a good harvest. The bird
droppings, called guano, is rich in nitrates and phosphates and provide a good source of manure
in the fields. Apart from this, large quantities of the guano also settle in the tanks, the waters of
which are used to irrigate the fields.
The significance of fostering the birds is well-embedded in young and the old alike. The children
in the village are trained to monitor bird casualties and report to the elders . The cause of death
of the birds is then ascertained, and any person found guilty is punished. Once a man was found
guilty of killing a fledgling. As a punishment his head was shaved and he was paraded on a donkey
with the bird tied around his neck.
There are some instances where fledglings fall out of their nests. The villagers make efforts to
case studies - tamil nadu

put them back in their nests or nurse them at home till they are old enough to fend for themselves.
Koondakulam has a small ‘nursery’ where these birds are reared and fed fresh stock of fish. One
villager is appointed in charge of the nursery. Birds can be very closely observed in this village.
With the owner’s permission, bird lovers can literally peep into the nests from the terraced houses
of the villagers. The birds are not perturbed by any such human intrusive activity since they are
accustomed to the villagers and the village.
The acacia trees, which now provide shelter to the birds, were planted under the Social Forestry
Scheme by the forest department. In 1993, FD tried to auction off these trees for fuelwood. This is
when the villagers got together and through their panchayat persuaded the FD to spare the trees.
In 1994, this place was declared a sanctuary and a village committee was formed to look after the
birds.
666
 Tamil Nadu 667

Impacts of community conservation

Waterfowl gather in these lakes in large numbers during the breeding season and nest in colonies
in secure spots where food is plentiful. In the countryside around Koondakulam, a large number
of other species of birds are also seen, such as the brahminy kite and Montague’s harrier, black
ibis, cattle egret, and Indian roller. All the birds that nest in Koondakulam are local ones and
not migratory. Migratory birds also come to these lakes, but they come only in the winters and
only to feed. Such birds include the black-winged stilt, sandpipers, godwits, Northern pintails,
mallards, blue-winged teals, comb ducks and the bar-headed goose. The bar-headed geese breed
in Ladakh and come south in the winters. This is the southernmost point where they can be
seen. The presence of such high numbers of fish and bird population indicates low or no pesticide
contamination of the lakes.

Constraints and opportunities

Till recently, Koondakulam was a remote and unknown village because of which few visitors
frequented the village. The scenario started to change when an enterprising travel agent included
this village in his itinerary. During the season, hundreds of tourists have now started coming
here more as a picnic spot rather than to observe birds. Since these tourists are unaware of the
importance of this site as a bird habitat, they end up causing much disturbance to the birds. The
villagers need to make serious and conscious efforts against the dangers of such tourism to ensure
that birds remain safe and undisturbed in this village.
It is believed that years ago painted storks used to nest in the tamarind trees in Moondradaipu
village on the main Tirunelveli-Nagarcoil highway. With the increase in vehicular traffic and
harassment, the birds have abandoned that spot and moved here. Efforts need to be made to
ensure that the same situation is not repeated here.

Conclusion
A heronry is an indication of the good health of a wetland. Critical to the environment, wetlands
maintain subterranean water, sustain food chains, control floods and provide habitat for wildlife.
By protecting heronries, villagers play an important role in conservation of biodiversity and
maintaining ecological functions.

This information has been extracted from S. Vinayakumar, ‘Koondakulam: A village heronry’,
The Hindu, 31 October 1999, and S. Vinayakumar, ‘Visitors at Koondakulam’, The Hindu, 17
December 2006.

For more details contact:

S. Subramanya
PHT scheme, J block, GKVK campus,
University of Agricultural Sciences,
Bangalore 560 065
Ph: 080-6585916 (R)
Email: subbus@vsnl.com
Or
case studies - tamil nadu

S. Theodore Baskaran
Email: thillaikan@yahoo.co.uk
Tripura
Tripura - an introduction
Location and biogeography
The state of Tripura, with a geographical area of 10,491 sq. km, is predominantly hilly. It is
surrounded on all sides by the deltaic basin of Bangladesh except for a small part in the north-east
which adjoins Cachar district of Assam, and Mizoram. The state is situated between 22°57’ and
24°82’ North latitudes and 91°10’ and 92°20’ East longitudes, with the Tropic of Cancer passing
through it.
Tripura is characterised by a warm and humid tropical climate with five distinct seasons, namely,
spring, summer, monsoon, autumn and winter. The winter is short followed by a brief spell of
spring. Average rainfall is about 2100 mm.
Five major hill ranges traverse the state in roughly north-south direction and continue southward
into Chittagong Hill Tract. The highest peak lies at Behliangchhip (Thaidawar, Shib-rangkhung), at
975.36 m above mean sea level (amsl). Gumti, Khowai, Manu-Deo and Muhuri are some of major
rivers in the State. The State has three distinct physiographic zones: i) hill ranges ii) undulating
plateau land and iii) low-lying alluvial land
60% (6,29,501 ha) of the total geographical area of this state is under forests while 27% of total
geographical area is available for agricultural purpose. The remaining 13% is used under non-
agricultural purpose and miscellaneous tree crops. 2.22% (22,921 ha) of the geographical area
constitutes water bodies.
Legally, the forests are categorized as reserved forests (RF), protected forests (PF) and public
forests (UF) (now called unclassified government forests). Out of the total forest area the reserved
forests (RF) area is 4,09,700 ha, or about two-thirds.
Since Tripura has tropical/sub-tropical climate with high rainfall, the forest types are mainly:
tropical evergreen; semi-evergreen; and moist deciduous. The most important minerals in the
state are oil, natural gas and glass sand.

Biodiversity
The land mammal species recorded so far are 90. Of a total of 15 species of non-human primates
in India, 7 are documented from Tripura. Around 342 species of avifauna and 289 species of faunal
and floral aquatic diversity are listed as per available records.
The notable mammalian fauna include tiger, elephant, leopard, slow loris, sloth bear, Indian wolf,
hog badger, binturang, marbled cat, leopard cat, Chinese pangolin, serow, goral, Malayan giant
squirrel, orange bellied squirrel, with many species of primates like hoolock gibbon.

Socio-economic profile
The human population of the state according to 2001 census is 3,199,203. People can be
divided into two predominant categories, namely tribal and non tribal Bengalis. Most of the tribal
people are the original inhabitants of the land. Major part of the population comprises of Bengali
Hindu migrants coming from Bangladesh, which was earlier East Pakistan. A small percentage is
constituted by Manipuris. There are 37 scheduled castes (SC) and 19 scheduled tribes in the state.
state chapter - tripura

The major tribes are Tripura or tripuri or tippeara, reang, jamatia, chakma, halam, noatia, mog,
kuki, garo, munda, lushai, orang, santhal, uchai, khasia, bhil, cheimal, bhutia, and lepcha. The
tripura tribe is largest in numbers and is also socially dominant.
The lushai, kuki, and darlong tribes are Christians. Chakmas and mogs are Buddhists and rest
of the tribes are mostly Hindus.
The main occupation in the State is agriculture. The Bengali community practices permanent
cultivation on low lying and flat terrain lands. The tribal people have been practicing shifting
cultivation (jhuming) on hill slopes since time immemorial. Both single crop system and mixed crop
system are practiced in Tripura.

671
672 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Administrative and political profile

Panchayats are exercising powers as per 73rd amendment of the Indian constitution. There are
874 revenue Moujas1 in the State, whereas, the number of towns is merely 10. The State is
represented by two Members of Parliament in the Lok Sabha and one Member of Parliament in
Rajya Sabha. The State Legislative Assembly has 60 seats. At present there are 4 districts in the
State, 15 civil Sub-Divisions, 31 Revenue Blocks, 183 Tehsils and 874 Revenue Moujas.
Special provisions in the Constitution of India are made to preserve the ethnic, cultural and
religious identity of the people, and maintain demographic uniqueness of the region and hence
Tripura is a sixth scheduled state under the Constitution Articles 244 (2) and 275 (1) which
governs the Tripura Tribal Areas District Council covering about 67% area of the State2. It is a self-
governing institution. It has its headquarters at Khumulwng, West Tripura District. The Council has
powers of administration and control in the following matters: allotment of land outside RF; use
of canal for agriculture; jhum cultivation; village health, sanitation and policing; primary schools;
markets; transport; waterways; fisheries; and dispensaries. It is responsible for management of
Protected Forest under its jurisdiction.

Conservation
While the forests of Tripura are rich in floral and faunal diversity providing various ecological
services, this fragile resource base has been diminishing due to various anthropogenic disturbances
resulting in degradation and loss of forest cover which is directly affecting the ecological stability,
biological diversity, economic viability & environmental security of the state.
A survey has revealed that about 10% of plant species and 21% of mammals are currently
endangered. The state has 603.62 sq. km. of area under 4 wildlife sanctuaries namely Gumti,
Rowa, Sapahijala and Trishna. Atharamura sanctuary is the fifth Sanctuary proposed. Gumti WLS
and Trishna WLS have also been recognized as Important Bird Areas (IBAs)3.
In 2005, Rudrasagar Lake with an expanse of 240 ha was declared as Ramsar Site. The lake
is abundant in commercially important freshwater fishes and freshwater scampi, with annual
production of 26 metric tons. It is an ideal habitat for IUCN Red listed Three-striped roof turtle.
Gumti WLS is another proposed Ramsar site.4
Various policies and schemes by the forest department operational in the state are joint forest
management (JFM), medicinal plants resource improvement, state afforestation policy and state
bamboo policy. Management of the forests of the state is under the north east forest policy. There
are 231 JFM committees (up to June 2002) in the State looking after 34,179 ha of forest areas
on care and share basis. These committees are responsible for the protection, afforestation, soil
conservation, etc of the forests and are entitled to the benefit sharing in such areas.
Along with these, 36 conservation hotspots (CHS) rich in biodiversity and harbouring highly rare
and endangered flora and fauna have been identified with the help of JFM members, NGOs and
forest officials. The specific biodiversity conservation plans for these sites are yet to take off.
The fisheries department has taken initiatives to propagate threatened and endangered species
of fish and some other aquatic fauna. A Policy has been formulated to train the rural masses for
sustainable aquaculture with rational use. The department has taken up re-establishment of giant
prawn, magor, pabda (kind of catfish) and fresh water turtle. There are also fish cooperative
societies for propagation and harvesting of local fish.
Tripura is also known to have many areas under traditional community management and
conservation. Not much information, however, could be collected on this. This compilation contains
only one example of community conservation from Tripura.

This information is compiled by Saili S. Palande based on; Forest Department, Govt of Tripura.
2002.Tripura State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Prepared under National Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan, Ministry of Environment and Forests (Government of India). Contained
in CD with TPCG and Kalpavriksh, Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report of the National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005). Other sources for specific
information are given in the text.
 Tripura 673

Endnotes
1
A cluster of few villages brought together for administrative purpose, smaller than taluka/tahsil.
2
Source: Advisory Panel on Decentralisation and Devolution; Empowerment and strengthening of Panchayati
Raj Institutions (2001). A Consultation Paper on Empowering and strengthening of Panchayati Raj institutions/
autonomous district councils/traditional tribal governing institutions in north east India. National Commission to
review the Working of the Constitution.
3
Source: M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani. Important Bird Areas of India: Priorities of Conservation. (Mumbai IBCN,
BNHS, UK: Bird Life International,UK. 2004).
4
M.Z.Islam and A.R. Rahmani. Potential Ramsar Sites in India. (Mumbai IBCN:BNHS and Birdlife International.
2006).

state chapter - tripura

 CCA/Tripura/CS1/West Tripura/Melghar/Joint forest management

Melghar region, West Tripura1

Background
The Melghar region in Sonmara Subdivision of West Tripura was once a dense forest of sal,
mixed with Vitex peduncularis and Terminalia bellerica. Legally they have been assigned a status
of Proposed Reserve Forest.
The India – Pakistan war in 1971 led to the creation of Bangladesh as an independent nation.
The war also led to a large number of refugees from Bangladesh crossing over to India and took
shelter in the forests in various states in India, including Tripura. Some of these were legal land
allocations by the government and many unauthorised occupations. As a result soon the state of
Tripura began to feel the population pressure and need for employment was huge. Unauthorised
and authorised settlements, resorting to timber felling and smuggling to meet livelihood needs,
increased population of livestock and increased hunting, along with other factors led to a fast
degradation of forests in Tripura. Within a decade not a tree was within sight and the land had
reduced to a vegetation of shrubs and coppice and severe shortage firewood and fodder and water
in some pockets was felt.

Towards community conservation

Finally in 1984, after years of poverty and despair, Subodh Sur, a young graduate, formed a group
of 15 youths in his village Rudijala in Melghar block. This group started spreading environmental
awareness amongst the people. In 1987, the Acharya Jagdish Chandra Bose Briksha Mitra Sangha
(AJCBMS) was officially formed. Group started its activities by initiating plantation activities in many
villages and establishing a makeshift nursery with bamboo and other local saplings. According to
Sur, the villagers who were earlier hesitant saw the results, and started to grow bamboo and other
trees on their lands.
Their efforts received a boost when the Tripura Govt. decided to adopt Joint Forest Management
in Tripura in 1993.The pilot project named ‘Jeevan Deep’ was launched in the Melghar region. The
first coppice protection exercise was started in 40 hectares of degraded forest with 230 families
with 10502 beneficiaries from four villages, namely, East Nalchar, Chandigarh, Mohanbhog and
Rudijala3. AJCBMS played a major role as a local NGO in interfacing between Forest Department
and the villagers. Devoted workers went door to door explaining the details of the new policies and
organised several meetings emphasising on the benefits of JFM.
A Forest Protection and Regeneration Committee was formed as per the Govt. guidelines with
the general body consisting of one member from each of the 230 families of the above mentioned
four villages and the executive committee of seven members; one member from each of the four
villages, one member from the local NGO (the secretary of AJCBMS), one woman member and one
member secretary (forester in charge of Melghar region).
The objective and functions of the committee was
• To ensure protection of forests/plantations from theft, illegal grazing, encroachment, fire, etc.
and to protect the wildlife in the area
case studies - tripura

• To facilitate timely execution of forestry programs

• To ensure smooth harvesting and benefit sharing
• To reduce the practice of jhumming by the beneficiaries4
To assist the Central Executive Committee, seven ‘Para’ or Local committees were formed.The
major activities of the Executive committee were site management of the major works distributed
in terms of protection, supervision and monitoring activities; regulation of benefit sharing,
particularly extraction of non timber forest produce (NTFPs) by beneficiaries such as firewood,
bamboos, fodder, broomsticks, wild vegetables/edible plants including mushrooms.

675
676 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Decisions concerning collection of firewood, bamboo, fodder, minor forest produce and herbs are
taken by holding a meeting once a month and carried out under the strict regulation formulated
by the committee. They were assisted by Nehru Yuva Kendra, an autonomous organisation of
the Government of India and soon 13,000 ha of land were forested and the number of involved
families rose to 340.

Impacts of community conservation

Remarkable improvement has been seen in the vegetation cover, species diversity and return
in minor wildlife since the protection. The quality of forest produce and availability of water has
improved as assessed by the villagers
The role of the women in forest protection was realised and a small scale industry to generate an
additional income for them in the form of sales of sticks for incense and ice creams was started. In
1996, a school was started in Melghar where youth from all over Tripura are taught the basics of
Joint Forest Management with a grant from The National Foundation of India. Agro based projects,
vocational training in cane and bamboo, and health awareness programmes were started.
The Acharya Jagdish Chandra Bose Briksha Mitra Sangha together with the Forest Dept. of
Tripura have not only been successful in weaning away the youth from illegal tree felling but
have also now made the people self sufficient in their needs. The success story of Melghar is now
spreading fast and other villagers in Tripura are now taking up such works.

Opportunities and constraints

Although the timber has not yet been harvested, the beneficiaries have already started reaping
the benefits of the protection by harvesting minor forest produce. Their NTFP demands for
household requirements such as construction purpose, vegetables, and fuelwood and marketable
commodities such as broomsticks are met.
Some of the constraints faced by the conserving community are
1. Although the local greenery has returned and NTFP needs met, the pace and volume of economic
returns are slow and low (possibly because of the high density of humans and cattle in the
area).
2. The input from other line departments for improved education, healthcare, nutrition supplements,
co-operative activities is very low.
3. There is a need for improved agriculture, particularly for growing of winter vegetables, kitchen
gardens etc. for supplementary income and nutritional needs.
4. There is also a need to build local capacity for skill development for value addition of forest
produces and trade/market linkages.
5. Revolving funds for micro-credits need to be encouraged non-land based economic activities
through sustainable micro-enterprises (low investment. quick returns)
6. Need for supplementing the program through organisation of self help groups, particularly
the women (for eg. Handlooms poultry rearing, mushroom cultivation etc. for sustainable
supplementary activities for income generation.)
7. lack of replicability of similar efforts in the immediate vicinity of the present CCA; need for
adoption of neighbouring villages through supply of quality planting materials of trees, NTFPs
etc.
8. Need for a conflict resolution mechanism (although there have been no major conflicts yet) but
there is a constant need for non-politicalization of the program/efforts.
9. THE FD officials predict problems in 17 years when the major harvest will take place since many
of the beneficiaries will be dead and there will be conflict in distribution between legal heirs
 Tripura 677

For more information contact:

Dr. S.K.Barik
Botany Dept.
North Eastern Hill University
Bijni Complex
Laitumkhra
Shilong 793022
TEL: 0364-250106 X 227
FAX: 0364-250108
TEL (R): 0364-231698
sk_barik@hotmail.com

Dr. V.T. Darlong

Ph: 09863021730
0364-2503531
drvtdarlong2002@yahoo.co.in

Endnotes
1
Yadav R., (2001) Born Again, Down to Earth Issue November 30.
Presentation of Dr. Barik & Dr. Darlong at the Workshop on Community Conserved Biodiverse Areas in India, Bhopal,
2001. Organised by Kalpavriksh and Indian Institute of Forest Management.
2
Beneficiaries were divided into three categories.
A. Families of daily labourers and the landless; B. Families with landholdings upto 4 kanis (0.16 ha=1kani); c. Land
holding above 4 kanis or government employees
3
Presentation of Dr. Barik & Dr. Darlong at the Workshop on Community Conserved Biodiverse Areas in India,
Bhopal, 2001. Organised by Kalpavriksh and Indian Institute of Forest Management.

case studies - tripura

Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh - community conservation in the
Gangetic plains
Afifullah Khan and Faiza Abbasi

1. Background
Uttar Pradesh has a total geographical area of about 243,291 sq km (7 per cent of the total
area of the country), supporting a total population of 166 million (about 16 per cent of India’s
population).1 A little over 80 per cent of the population is Hindu, about 18 per cent Muslim, while
other religions (Christianity, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism) account for very small minorities.2
Some 21 per cent of the total population belongs to scheduled castes. In 1996–97, 42.3 per cent of
the rural population was estimated to be below poverty line (BPL), and in 1993- 94, 35.4 per cent
of the urban population was BPL.3 A vast majority of the population depends on biomass based
subsistence economy.4
The state’s geography is dominated by two of India’s mightiest rivers. From the Himalayan
foothills, the Ganga and Yamuna flow parallel to each other for about 500 km, at a distance of
about 80-120 km from each other. This region is called Doab and narrows beyond Etawah till these
rivers join in Allahabad. There are two distinct areas in the Doab: the khader or the river basin
and the bangar or inter-fluvial lowlands plateau that lies 5-10 km above khader and is bordered by
bhur (the sandy embankment). Between the bangar and the bhur is the clearance or the bankati
area, which was first used in the 19th century for cultivation. A 20-30 km-wide protracted basin
extends along the Doab from Muzaffarnagar beyond Etah and Mainpuri. In the course of thousands
of years of agricultural activity in the Doab, highly refined farming and irrigation methods have
developed that are appropriate to this region.5

2. A history of community and conventional conservation

The roots of civilization in Uttar Pradesh, known as the United Province in the British era, are as
old as the Indian subcontinent. The tradition of nature conservation, an ancient practice in India,
has also been observed in this most highly populated state in the North Indian plains.
Historically, Uttar Pradesh may be said to have passed through four major stages of the relationship
of communities to nature: the hunter-gatherer stage, the agricultural stage, conservation under
the monarchies, and the colonial stage.
Until the early decades of the 20th century, many communities depended on hunting and gathering
for livelihood. The abundant rainfall and rich vegetation of their habitats facilitated the reproduction
of subsistence almost exclusively through the collection of roots and fruits and the
hunting of small game. From about 1200 to 600 BC the Gangetic plains were
colonised by the dominant agricultural pastoral people of the so-called Aryan
culture. With the introduction of iron tools in the 6th century BC, agriculture reached
state chapter - uttar pradesh

a level of development not to be significantly exceeded until the 19th century,6 when
irrigation works began to be constructed on a large scale.
Government intervention in the management of natural resources was the most
significant event in the history of conservation in India. By 1900 over 20 percent
of India’s land area had been taken over by the forest department (FD). State
reservation of forests by the colonial government in the mid-19th century sharply
affected the subsistence activities of hunter-gatherer communities. As a result,
these groups were forced to abandon their traditional occupations and to eke
out a precarious living by accepting a subordinate role in the dominant system
of agricultural production. The study of colonial forest policies has brought to the
fore two contradictory notions of resource use: on the one hand, communal control
over forests is paired with subsistence use, and on the other, state control is paired
with commercial exploitation.

681
682 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

2.1. Traditional practices of resource management

Communities involved in conservation of natural resources possessed a variety of practices
apparently leading to sustainable use of a wide range of biological resources and conservation
of biological diversity as a whole. These practices include total protection of certain biological
communities or species; protection of certain life-history stages or during certain seasons;
restrictions on methods and amounts of harvest and on certain social, age or sex groups from
harvesting certain species; and restriction of access to certain localities to certain groups or
individuals. Whenever these decisions appear to be taken and enforced by the group as a whole,
it suggests that what is being ensured is long-term group interest in resource conservation, which
may be against the short-term interest of individual users. The reasons for such decisions may be
the influence of a variety of factors in UP; some of these are religious associations, social structure
by the caste system, regulations by a ruling monarchy and colonial efforts.7

2.1.1. Religious associations

The first traces of community conservation of resources are found in the religious, philosophical
and artistic involvement of flora and fauna. The Vedas, Puranas and epics acknowledge the
sacredness of forests and various animals. Generations of communities grew up taking lessons from
the Hitopadeshas, Jatakas, Panchatantra and many other fables that assert the great qualities of
animals.8 Religious associations of certain species of plants and animals or compassion for another
living being also contribute in the formulation of conventional methods of ecosystem management
in the area. There were no individual property rights that existed in UP before the British invasion.
Religion was law, and various protective mechanisms such as gauchar (pasture), abhyaranya
(sanctuary) and aranya (dense forest) were revered due to their religious association in scriptures,
epics and folklore. For example, the peepal tree is worshiped; sarus cranes are not killed because
they signify prosperity; killing of Gangetic river dolphins is considered as a bad omen by some
fisherfolk; leaves of wood apple are a part of every puja; leaves of ashoka are used in religious
ceremonies; monkeys and elephants are never killed because they are incarnations of gods; the
house swift has a sacred mention in the holy Koran and hence Muslims protect its nest and never
shoot one.
The Vamana Purana has established the connection of plants to various Hindu gods—e.g., the
lotus is a symbol of Vishnu, wood apple symbolises Goddess Laxmi, khair is a sign for Lord Brahma
and dhatura is the fruit of Mahesh. Various plants have also been attributed divine powers in
mythology.9 Ber and mahua are considered harbingers of fertility, kush is supposed to be the
abode of all gods, and turmeric is supposed to be the favorite of all gods.
In Padma Puranam the Srishti Kand had mentioned rgw gains of sowing and planting some
species: peepal for acquiring wealth and getting rid of illness, ashoka for removal of misery, and
pomegranate for getting a life-partner of choice. Neem has a lot of significance, besides being a
measure for appeasing the Sun God. Ayurveda, which is the oldest system of curative medicine,
depends on the extraction of medicines solely from plant parts. A herb of sweet basil is considered
incomparable for the volume of goodness it brings to the household, as it is the abode of all dieties.
Trees are also related to the various fasts that exist in the Hindu religion. They hold relevance in
the fields of astronomy and astrology too.

2.1.2. Caste system

The age-old caste system, which was an unofficial rule for every village society, held innate rules
for the effective management of resources. Some resources were commonly used and controlled
by small multi-caste village communities, in which different caste groups are linked to each other
in a web of reciprocity. This type of communal management favours sustainable use of common
property resources, and it lasted till the colonial invasion when communally managed resource
were converted into open access resources.
Caste society, which emerged at the conclusion of the wave of agricultural
colonisation around 500 AD, was made up of tens of thousands of
endogamous groups, each with its own, often highly specialized, hereditary
mode of subsistence. Caste society differs from other hierarchical societies
in being segmented and made up of discrete sub-groups. Each sub-group
that belongs to this type of caste society is relatively homogenous, with all its
members traditionally pursuing a well-defined, similar mode of subsistence
and having very similar level of access to resources.
 Uttar Pradesh 683

From an ecological perspective, social organization may be viewed in terms of distribution of

access to resources. Caste society’s sympatric endogamous groups had so partitioned the use of
specialized biological resources that a particular resource tended to be monopolised by a particular
endogamous group in a given region. This diversified the ecological niches of the different coexisting
endogamous groups. For example, the Chamars draw their livelihood from dead animal carcasses
and hides; the Karmis are artisans involved in woodcraft but they do not collect wood from the
forest—instead, they buy it from the Lakadhara or woodcutter community, who derive it from the
forest with sufficient concern for the regeneration capacity of the tree and other rules such as not
cutting trees with nesting birds; clean drinking water is controlled by the Bhishtis; the Quereishi
caste is responsible for lawfully slaughtering meat and selling it amongst Muslims; and so on.
The diversification of resource use promoted sustainability in two ways — by restricting access to
many specialized resources of any given locality to members of just one endogamous group and
by linking together members of different endogamous group in a network of reciprocal exchanges
and mutual obligations. Since each group adheres to a particular mode of subsistence, competition
between them is little. Rather they are linked together and become interdependent. This system
presents interesting parallels with the way resource partitioning takes place in ecological (plant
and animal) communities.10

2.1.3. Regulations by monarchs

Emperor Ashoka had promulgated game laws in the 3rd century BC, which accorded protection to
various species of animals. Under the Buddhist faith, some animals were considered as incarnations
of the Bodhisattvas and were never killed.
The freshwater turtle (indeterminate species) and the wild pig were respectively called kacchap
avatar and waraha avatar. The Gangetic river dolphin was also revered and protected under the
game laws of Ashoka. Under the influence of those laws, some fishermen on the banks of the river
Ganga still believe that for killing a dolphin their family will have to pay by the death of a family
member.
The Gangetic river dolphin also finds a mention in the Baburnama (the autobiography of Babur,
the first Mughal emperor in India). Modern Indian scientists consider the section of the Baburnama
which deals with India to be the first illustrated natural history account of the country. Babur also
describes the presence of the lesser florican and Himalayan monal near Agra.11
Babur’s greatest contribution was his introduction of terraced gardens. Bagh-gul-I-afshan, later
known as Arambagh and now called Rambagh in Agra, is one of the many gardens he laid out.
Many East India Company gardens were in fact founded on the sites of old Mughal gardens. The
garden at Saharanpur, revivified by the Marquis of Hastings and J. Forbes–Royal was an early
example.12 These gardens provided a reserve where plant biodiversity and various avian species
were maintained.
Wild flora and fauna were considered as natural resources and although hunting for game was in
fashion, it was quite regulated and probably rarely exercised to the extent of bringing the population
of any wild species to the brink of extinction.13 During the reign of Jehangir, who ruled his empire
from his capital Agra in Western UP, forests were maintained as game conservancies. Sporadic
and unauthorized hunting was strictly prohibited. He maintained a hunting department, which
made a list of all the animals killed by hunting. This list was produced in front of him whenever
he left the city and re-entered. It was so detailed that it also mentioned the number of heads of
wild cats, quadrupeds, wild fowl and other birds. While the emperor himself was on a hunting
state chapter - uttar pradesh

expedition, only his personal servants and the experts genuinely required by him were involved.
No one else was allowed to remain in order that trampling horses should not trample the grain in
the fields. Delimited by natural boundaries, hunting grounds called shikargah (game conservancy)
were specified by the king. Any type of hunting was allowed only within these grounds.
Jehangir also announced a period of hunting, which lasted for several months. During this period,
records of all animals killed were made, and beyond this duration no hunting was allowed all over
the Mughal empire.

2.1.4. Community conservation of wild species

Keystone species such as ficus trees may receive total protection over a wide area and may serve
to support a whole range of insects, birds, primates and other organisms. Similarly, there are
many incidents of a single species accorded special protection by a community. For example, the
ahir community near the village Etawah in western UP has a sentimental association with the sarus
684 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

crane population in the area. Under this they conserve the bird and take offence if any attempt is
made to harm them. This protection lies deep in the traditions respected by this community.14
In the Mughal capital town of Agra, the most commonly seen animal was once India’s largest
antelope, the nilgai or blue bull. It is neither blue nor bovine, as its name erroneously suggests, but
it is an antelope of larger size. In the 17th century AD, the Mughal emperor Jehangir, who had a
keen interest in natural history, changed its name from nilghod (blue horse) to nilgai (blue bull) on
account of its declining population, since it was the favourite target of game hunters. Since then,
the Hindus, who worship the cow as a mother, began giving protection to the blue bull. Shrinking
habitat made this antelope ransack the crop fields and gazetteers reported a century later, ‘The
blue bull has hitherto enjoyed immunity on account of its name but the villagers have now realized
its capacity for destruction and they do not object to its being killed by shikaris.’15 However,
despite having licences many farmers would still not kill the blue bull themselves.
Other traditional restrictions included a restriction of seasons during which certain forms of
harvests could be made as well as the quantities to be harvested. The trade in edible fish undergoes
a period of rest every year for a duration of about four months. During this period people neither
eat fish nor is fish caught or sold. This is because the duration between the months of May and
August is supposed to be the breeding season of the ichthyofauna (species of fish) in fresh water.
While harvesting the fruits of sacred groves such as bagichas and akharas belonging to temple
trusts, it is customary to leave some fruits for the monkeys and birds. The Bahelia caste, which is
involved in trapping and netting of birds and their trade, do not practice their occupation during
the breeding season of the species they catch.

2.1.5. Land use practices by pastoralists

Many traditional land use systems include not only those areas inhabited by them at all times
but also other sites that are used intermittently. For example, the Gujjars, an indigenous pastoral
community, are seasonal migrants and use certain areas periodically at different times of the
year. The systematic non-damaging land use practiced by intermittent users such as pastoralists16
following traditional practices have their innate advantages to the upkeep of natural wealth.

2.2. Past and current trends

The breakdown of traditional systems of conservation was the result of various trends with
colonial state intervention being the most severe influence. The Gangetic plains were subject to
systematic destruction of biological communities and subjugation of indigenous populations by
the agricultural Aryans, whose activities led to a periodic alteration of forest cover and gradual
denudation. However, irreversible ecological decline came only with the industrial revolution even
in the Ganga Yamuna Doab.17 Technological innovations enabled certain human groups to break
down territorial barriers and to usurp the resources of other groups. Colonial interests lay mainly
in taking control of as much of the country’s resources as possible.
The industrial revolution demanded a quantity of fuel and timber for the commercial sector in
Europe, and this inspired the colonial government to put a moratorium on communities managing
their own resource base. Artisanal industry declined under the twin pressures of diminishing sources
of raw materials and competition from machine-made goods. This further affected the symbiotic
relationship between communities and their forests, as they turned to other sources of livelihood.
The redefinition of property rights by the colonial state imposed a system of management on the
forest whose priorities sharply conflicted with earlier systems of local use and control. The new
laws restricted small-scale hunting by tribal peoples but facilitated more
organised shikar expeditions by the British. From the mid-19th century
there began a large-scale slaughter of animals by British shikaris of all
levels.
There is a characteristic difference between the hunting laws made by the
Mughals and the British. The Mughals themselves also abided by the laws of
shikargah and hunting periods, whereas the British rulers made laws only for
other citizens while themselves continuing with uncontrolled poaching and reckless
exploitation of natural resources. As far as the tribals are concerned, the Mughals
never considered their subsistence killing of wild animals as hunting and never imposed
such regulations as for game hunting. This is why there are no historical records of
retaliation from the people against Mughal game laws. The people understood that they
are for regulating game and not subsistence activities. On the other hand it is evident that
the colonial rule introduced large-scale exploitation of natural resources and evoked antagonism
in the people at being alienated.
 Uttar Pradesh 685

Thus the new laws inspired a reactionary force which could be distinctly seen in the change in
hunting practices. Since hunting expeditions by the British were not banned, villagers too hunted
indiscriminately, trying to be one step ahead of them. In order to generate revenue for the state,
high taxes were levied on the communities for deriving a living from their very own resources.
One such example was found in gazetteers of Azamgarh district. It has been stated that in some
parganas (present-day talukas) of Azamgarh, tar or toddy palm was abundant and a large income
was annually drawn from the lease of the right to collect and sell tari (the sap obtained from
sapping). Similarly, wildfowl in Azamgarh were netted and the dues levied on those who practiced
this occupation often brought in considerable income.18
After the establishment of British rules in 1801, agricultural practices changed drastically due to
the move from food crops to soil-intensive cash crop production. This resulted in desertification
due to erosion, salinisation and ravaged agriculture. This led to serious ecological degradation in
parts of south Delhi and as far as Kanpur. The British then built canals to irrigate these crops.
However, this severely damaged the river ecosystem, disturbing the water tables in various
areas and resulting in flooding, swamping and sloughing of crop fields. The significance of British
intervention lies in the novel and often inappropriate modes of resource extraction made possible
by the dominance of the Raj and the availability of technologies previously foreign to India.

3. Current status of community conservation

3.1. Continuing, revived or modified traditions of community
conservation
3.1.1. Protection to a single species
Partly in continuation of ancient traditions (see Section 2.1), banyan, peepal and other fig species
of the genus ficus continue to be widely protected and even today are rarely cut down. Figs are
now recognized by ecologists as keystone resources—dry-season staples for many species of birds
and mammals, especially monkeys—that play a pre-eminent role in the ecosystem. It is a common
sight in almost every village or locality to see a peepal tree with signs of daily worship. Also species
such as blue bull and sarus crane continue to be protected by local communities.

3.1.2. Protection of a particular habitat type

There are instances of entire biological communities being associated with a deity and receiving
protection, in the form of sacred groves or sacred ponds or any other habitat or its part. The
sacred groves serve the preservation of biological diversity and genotype—which may be useful in
breeding, and includes common as well as rare species, which are equally important. Being a climax
form of vegetation, sacred groves are richer in diversity than all other successive vegetation. With
the clearing of forests all around them, they are now the last refuges for many plants and other
life forms dependent upon them in many areas.
Of late, people have also started recognising the importance of these groves on the grounds of
ecological benefits and compassion for animal dwellers. As a result, in two major pilgrimage sites
of the Hindu religion alone—Mathura and Benares—184 sacred groves have been listed.19 There
may even be more because by tradition every village or a cluster of villages has planted some
sacred trees near a place of worship.
In Mathura there are numerous temples and ghats (riverside platforms) with a stand of trees
sacred to the people. They range in size from just one tree to as many as a few thousand. In the
state chapter - uttar pradesh

Mathura district alone there are 108 sacred groves and ponds held as sacred and revered by the
community. Varanasi is full of ghats and temples where natural resources are given protection due
to their association with a holy site. In this district there are 76 small and large sacred groves and
ponds. Old gurukuls (places of learning) and hermitages of ancient gurus are maintained as sacred
groves. For example, the Sarnath temple, which is known as the Mrigdava in Buddhist literature,
draws its name from a legend. The Bodhisatva was born as a Nyagrodhmriga (deer) and granted
herds of deer the freedom of moving without fear in the forest. Deer are still not hunted in this
place.
Most of the sacred groves are situated either near a temple, ghat, pond or tomb. In Benares
it has been found that the orchards near burial grounds are also considered sacred. Muslim and
Christian communities also give protection to stands of trees with the belief that they bring peace
to the dead in the graves.20
686 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

3.2. New self-initiated efforts by the local communities

Conforming to their old traditions, some village institutions of western UP have taken steps to
rekindle conservation of their own natural resources.
Patna Lake in Etah district was conserved as a sacred site due to religious associations, but was
later notified as a sanctuary in 1991. The local community has been alienated from managing
the resources and making sustainable use except for having access to a temple in the sanctuary
premises. However they still oppose illegal poaching in the area and regard biodiversity conservation
as their duty (See Case Studies).
The case of Sheikha Lake in the Dhanipur block of Aligarh District is one where there is not
much intervention from the state in the management and protection of the natural ecosystem.
Despite the fact that public powers are limited, the people take care in protecting the ecosystem by
checking poaching and regulating the subsistence use of the natural habitat (See Case Studies).
Last, but not the least, the case of Gursikaran village in Aligarh District is a living example of how
a tortuous maze of laws and slow judicial processes obstruct community-based conservation. The
community was making sustainable use of an old patch of forest until it was declared a reserved
forest by the British and then given to the state-owned Central Dairy Farm (CDF). All was well until
the CDF decided to clear the forest and sell the land to industrial units. The community fiercely
rose to oppose the move through a village-level NGO and is still struggling to save the forest in the
courts. The financial cost of this battle is being borne by the peasants (See Case Studies).

3.3. New externally aided efforts

3.3.1. Private forests
Under the Indian Forest Act of 1927 (Section 3, 28, 29, 38 and 80 of IFA 1927), joint management
agreements could be signed between private landowners and the state. In the old district gazetteers
are mentions of groves of jhau and Tamarix spp., which were before Independence maintained
as private forests owned by the Jats and Pathans in Aligarh district.21 Later these gave way to
agricultural reclamation when the owners sensed an intention of the state to declare them reserved
forests. Even today in Jaalpur and Saahanpur villages of Najibabad District in western UP there are
some existing patches of khair forests.22

3.3.2. Social Forestry

The second attempt to bring people into forestry and ecosystem management was in the mid-
1970s. During this time the National Commission on Agriculture sought massive involvement of
rural people in the Social Forestry Scheme, a programme of fuel and fodder plantations in order
to check deforestation. Under social forestry, some village common lands or private lands are
used for plantation of fuel and fodder species and looked after by the Divisional Forest Officer
(DFO) for three years. Later, planted village commons are handed over to the gram samaj (Village
Council). Sadly, this attempt gave way to socio-economic problems. The failure of social forestry
was probably due to inter- and intra-village conflicts over use of resources. As a result, today
social forestry areas do thrive—not as biodiversity refuge but merely as timber, fuel and fodder
reserves.23

3.3.3. Joint Forest Management

The third attempt to seek people’s participation in forest management (in pursuance of the
National Forest Policy 1988), is the Joint Forest Management (JFM) programme in government-
owned forests. Various state governments took the necessary steps following the Government of
India circular on JFM.24
The objective of the JFM approach is to develop resource users into resource managers by
complementing the scientific management practices for realising the twin objectives of ecological
security and fulfilment of resource needs of the population.
Some fine examples of JFM in UP can be seen in the districts of Pilibheet, Jhansi, Lalitpur and
Sheikhapur and in the Faridpur tehsil in Bareilly. Aligarh district has also received a World Bank-
sponsored project for introducing JFM in ten villages of the district. This was sanctioned based on
the satisfactory performance of the JFM programme in two villages, namely, Gazipur in Attrauli
tehsil and Umrikala in Gabhana tehsil. The gram samaj of these villages had been sanctioned Rs
 Uttar Pradesh 687

150,000 for applying for JFM in the years 1999 and 2000. Despite the success of a few examples
mentioned above, JFM is not very successful in UP according to the FD, partly because of inadequate
studies of the ground situation before implementing the scheme. We do believe that JFM would be
an effective means to facilitate and promote community conservation in UP but only after adequate
studies have been made on its current status and prospects. Also it is important to take people
into absolute confidence as our interactions revealed that there was little information or knowledge
about JFM among the villagers, even where JFM was being implemented.

3.4. Constraints and opportunities

3.4.1. Shortcomings of laws and policies
The edifice of colonial forestry has been taken over by the Government of India. It is by now
well established that the imperatives of colonial forestry were essentially commercial. Community-
based conservation faced serious threats in the form of state intervention and the scenario has not
changed much. After the formation of an elected government in 1950, the colour and face of those
that implemented state control changed but the laws remained the same. Needless to say, all these
laws had done nothing but debar the community from taking charge of its habitat. So neglected
was the idea of community-based conservation that the UP Forest Act that was implemented
in 1927 has yet to be amended to involve a community element.25 The IFA should give proper
recognition to community conserved areas based on the ecological status of the area and the level
of the people’s interest in conserving it. The IFA also needs to empower the community to take
action against vandalism and give them a stake in management.
Various laws and policies have been formulated to preserve biodiversity but none comprehend the
spirit of community conservation and accord it due attention. Laws such as the Forest Conservation
Act. 1980, have provisions within them that alienate the local people further by denying rights over
minor subsistence operations in the forests. The UP Tree Protection Act, 1973, pronounces that
even for cutting a tree from private lands, the owners need permission from the forest department.
Under the UP Sawmill Act, 1972, the licenses for sawmills will be given by the forest department.
The UP Tree Protection Act is seen by people as an instrument to take over the control of natural
resources from the community, and thus acts as a discouragement to conserve. On the other hand
the UP Sawmill Act might be detrimental to community conservation if it provides licenses for
logging areas being conserved by the local community, as in the case of Gursikaran village (see
case study for details).

3.4.2. Impossibility of centralised protection and law enforcement

The forest department alone is incapable of protecting 61 million hectares of forest land in the
country and the same holds true for Uttar Pradesh as well. In the face of growing demands on
forest produce, this problem needs to be addressed from a different angle, which must have a
community element in it. Limited funds and staff available to enforce resource-preserving rules
is a limitation typical to developing countries like India, which have many pressing priorities that
may appear more important than the long-term conservation of natural resources. Community
involvement could help resolve trans-boundary problems, which are otherwise long-drawn and
difficult to control. This problem gains extra magnitude in UP due to its near-1000 km-long porous
border with Nepal that runs through tough terrain. Locals, who know their regions intimately, have
a greater chance of being able to protect them.
state chapter - uttar pradesh

3.4.3. Demographic constraints and opportunities: Population and poverty

UP is a predominantly agrarian state and topsoil losses in the productive agricultural land render
the soil infertile. The only way to restore soil fertility and check soil erosion is to make vegetative
bunds. Eco-friendly agricultural practices would produce a larger subsistence base for this densely
populated state. It is clear that bringing more and more of the rural population into integrated
management (that also provides emoluments to the customary right-holders) increases the
subsistence base. By taking up the admittedly difficult challenge of motivating and organising
the people to look after their own resource base, we can hope to bring our country on a path of
development that would be at once environmentally and socially sustainable.26
688 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

3.4.4. Ecological constraints: Inappropriateness of monoculture plantations

Centralised efforts of nature conservation in the name of forestry largely result in the plantation
of timber tree species such as teak. Teak and eucalyptus are being planted in the name of forestry
in the state for fast gains of wood and timber. The forest department also shows these plantations
in the light of conservation imperatives when they have to show measures taken to combat soil
erosion, siltation and deforestation. This is in spite of the fact that community forests’ contributions
to rural employment, agriculture, water conservation and other sectors far outweigh the revenue
from timber. Exotic, fast-growing trees tend to expose the soil surface to erosive and desiccative
forces like laterization more than does the native vegetation cover. Similarly other fast-growing
trees of timber revenue such as safeda and poplar, that are preferred in forestry operations27 also
cause reduced soil productivity and low water tables in adjoining areas.

3.4.5. Failures of social forestry models and reserved forests

The demotivation to follow rules or non-cooperation on the part of the resource users is almost
always increased by the antagonistic relations between them and the government.28 This is
attested by the utterly negative reaction of UP forest dwellers to India’s National Forest Policy. It
is to a large extent because of the dogged determination of villagers and activists that the forest
management policies of the government were changed.29
One of the major reasons for the failure of the social forestry programme was the top-down
approach of the government agencies. In addition, one of the reasons that community woodlots
or village woodlots failed was on account of the lack of interest shown by community members,
which was mainly because of their basic distrust of the FD. In many instances, the administration
had to enrol local inhabitants almost by force to have them participate in its social forestry
programmes.30
The model of village woodlots was modified as a consequence of its failure, to give considerable
management authority to the village panchayats (local elected councils). When the panchayats are
oversized there is always a possibility of internal politics stoked by corruption in the government
officials. Such panchayats could not involve the local people on whom the success of the programme
depended. Another reason is that these panchayats largely perceived the woodlots as sources of
communal income and not as a perpetual source of fuelwood, fodder and grazing land for meeting
the needs of the common peasants. In a large-sized panchayat comprising f councillors with varied
interests it is difficult to arrive at a consensus over invoking the discipline needed for managing
plantations, and most of them were thus doomed to ultimate felling after a minimum of three
years. With these panchayats it was also not possible to develop the coordination of all village-
level governing bodies needed for continuity in management and control of thousands of scattered
pieces of planted village lands creating enormous problems of protection.
In Uttar Pradesh, villagers sometimes deforested woodlands because they were apprehensive
that the demarcation of reserve forest would be followed by the government taking away other
wooded areas from their control. More specifically, forest reservation evoked the fear that if the
villagers looked after the forests as of yore, a passing forest official would say, ‘Here is a promising
bit of forest—the government ought to reserve it.’ If on the other hand they ruin their civil forest,
they feel free from such reservation.31
It is also powerful local bosses or patrons who may force the government to retrace its steps or to
abstain from implementing management schemes. Thus in some areas of U.P., the administration
does not dare to mete out legal punishments or impose legal fines for contravening regulations
(e.g. to cut off electricity for well owners who ignored spacing regulations) for fear of violent
reactions by the people concerned and their determined leaders or for fear that they may shift
parties in the next elections.

3.4.6. Lack of information

A major difficulty with any centralised approach to resource management
is a problem of information. Given the great diversity of resource types,
it is difficult to establish straightforward management prescriptions that
can be widely followed. No government agency can know local realities in
sufficient details to conceive of valid solutions to the highly differentiated
ecological problems that arise at village levels.32 The government is clearly
at a disadvantage compared to the historic users who can be expected to
possess extensive local knowledge of local resources and constraints.33
 Uttar Pradesh 689

On the other hand, the rapid socio-economic changes in the village environments result in a
lack of information of ongoing processes of resource depletion to the local inhabitants themselves.
Thus, the information gap between specialised government agencies has probably narrowed down
and the villagers may actually need external assistance to help them better assess their resource
problems and to conceive and put into effect viable solutions to them.

3.4.7. Problems in Joint Forest Management efforts

It is understood that JFM can work in three circumstances:34 first, in the villages which are small,
single caste-dominated, inaccessible from the markets and whose populations are highly dependent
on the forest resources; second, where survival gains from JFM organisations are high, both for
the village elite as well as the commons; and third, when there is a political will for non-monetary
gains. With these conditions in mind, UP does not emerge as promising and a potential area for JFM
because of what has happened in the past centuries to the natural wealth of the state.
The conversion to agriculture and then the commercial exploitation by the British have left the
state with only a few patches of natural forest in the Terai. The remaining are chunks of plantations,
raised by the government.
About half a decade after JFM was introduced in the state it has been realized that the laws in the
state are often contradictory to each other. For example, on the one hand JFM is made to promote
joint benefit sharing, and on the other the Forest Conservation Act 1980 (FCA) bans assignment
or lease of forest land to the people and prohibits plantation of horticulture crops without the prior
permission of the government. The NFP of 1988, which brought in JFM-like arrangements, also
actually helped to curtail the rights and concessions of forest dwellers by relating them to the
carrying capacity of the forest.
A result of this is being borne by the Tharu tribe in the eastern Terai districts of UP (from Lakhimpur
and Pilibheet up to Gorakhpur). Here the FD had settled a large number of poor villagers on forest
land to do taungia35 plantation. For the last one hundred years they were cultivating forest lands in
the first few years of raising plantations as well as looking after the new plants. However despite
the fact that recorded rights exist showing their claims over forest lands for cultivation, the FCA
has now denied them any rights to those lands. Coupled with the fact that the practice of Taungia
has been given up, these poor people are now without work or assets. Moreover they are not even
in a position to receive any alternative benefits from NGOs or Government development schemes
because they are not even considered as ‘locals’.
Suggested changes in Government Orders pertaining to JFM and community management:36
• Use rights of communities should be revised and user groups recognized. Protecting communities
should have clearly defined property rights over their forest in comparison to distant villages.
• FPC should be made an independent and spontaneous entity.
• Only the FPC should manage and control all natural resources within its domain.
• In the current age of globalisation and disinvestments, the markets for NTFPs should also be free
of controls and they should be denationalised.
• The focus of JFM should shift from increasing the forest cover towards a plethora of other biomass-
based products and conserving biodiversity. It should aim at empowering people and providing
them sustained benefits. This can happen only if the FD does proper research for studying the
needs and interests of people and then gearing up to shift to silvo-pastoral sytems.
state chapter - uttar pradesh

• The policies and programmes should be sensitive to gender and poverty issues too and not just
to the wider national interest.
• Instead of prescribing norms for the community the government orders should leave more
possibilities for flexibility and decentralization, so that many of the decisions are left to the
judgment of the people.
• JFM requires a paradigm shift that cuts across sectors of other departments. Unless these radical
changes are brought in defining people’s rights and silvicultural practices, true participation will
not be achieved.

3.4.8. The misuse of powers by the state judiciary

Local communities invariably lack legal powers to apprehend and fine offenders. Even in a
community conserved area they have to inform the forest department, which has the powers to
690 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

book an offence. Often communities are disheartened and discouraged when, after taking the
offenders to the officials, villagers find that the offenders are not convicted because of corruption.
If magisterial powers are handed over to the community it might be helpful in preventing intruders
from ransacking a community conserved area.
An example is Sheikha Lake, where, angry at the rampant poaching of migratory waterfowl in
the lake, the community united to give a memorandum to the district magistrate with signatures
of all individuals demanding immediate action to check the illegal shooting of birds. With the help
of local NGOs they also decided to file a PIL against the violation of laws (Wild Life Protection Act
1972, amended 1991).

3.4.9. Cultural changes

With rapid urbanisation and the invasion of a consumerist culture, the structure of the community
and its component unit, the joint family, have also been eroded. JFM policies and other participatory
programmes depend heavily on the community work culture. In the absence of this culture,
community forestry cannot achieve a success as big as that of agroforestry. A restructuring of social
values to strengthen the community structure is needed to revive community conservation.

3.4.10. Inter and intra-village conflicts compounded by state control

The establishment of state control also severely affected another aspect, namely, the management
of inter and intra-village conflicts over access to natural resources. Indigenous wisdom had managed
and resolved these problems in the past.
Once the community systems were broken and controls went into the hands of FD, it was
impossible to enforce the discipline required in the people to manage natural resources on an
equitable sharing basis. After having liquefied the rural controls, the FD and the panchayats failed
to establish, define and publicise the rights to the resources and the procedures for marketing and
allocating benefits. The shares which would go to the individuals, village panchayats and the FD
were not clearly laid down. Insecurity about benefits led to differences in the people. In addition
the conflicts arising due to encroachment, competition from other departments, competition from
grazing and other existing local uses could also not be solved by the FD in an effective manner
because the government does not possess an integrated approach towards solving conflicts that
cuts across the sectoral powers of departments. For example, in the case study of Gursikaran it can
be seen how FD is rendered powerless in establishing clear controls over the forest because other
state departments such as Central Dairy Farm, Revenue Board and the Sugarcane Department are
all taking independent decisions to manage the area. Meanwhile the people are struggling to win
back their rights to use the resource base.

3.5. Emerging lessons

Having related the views of intellectuals, historians and scientists about community-based
conservation, its history, present status and future prospects, it is time to put forward what we
personally experienced while going through available literature and doing the case studies. We
must start with the honest confession that the scenario of community-based conservation in UP is
not picture-perfect. Rapid modernization and the lure of a high-class consumerist life have made
the ethics and cultural values change
in the village communities of our state. In turn this modernization has also affected the age-old
tradition of communities managing their resources in a sustainable fashion and imbibing it from
the basic structure of their deep-rooted civilizations.
We do not have to go far back to trace the roots of this kind of disastrous ecological and ethnic
alteration. The advent of colonial rule a couple of centuries ago
was accompanied by the ransacking of the natural wealth and
the cultural ethos of the native communities to cater to the needs
of the industrial revolution in Europe. Sadly Independence also
brought nothing new in this respect, and reckless exploitation
of natural resources and alienation of communities from their
natural resource base continued at the same pace.
By now it is well established that as the government imposes
all its decisions on the public, native communities are losing the
 Uttar Pradesh 691

wisdom accumulated by ages of experiencing their natural surroundings. The knowledge that has
survived and thrived over years of passing from one generation to another is gradually being
dissipated in a show where the government is the player and the communities have been reduced
to mute spectators. As a result today community conservation is confronting the most alarming
threat, which is the drifting away of younger generation from its values. This is where the chain of
traditional systems has broken. In all our case studies we found that people have started relying
on the government or some authorized urban person to come and take charge of the habitat so
that poaching is checked and the habitat is saved. In ecosystems that were conserved as a sacred
grove, such as the Patna Jheel religious association, remain the same but due to notification of
a protected area communities are happy to give the charge to the government. Hence for the
younger generation, conservation of biological resources has lost importance.
In other cases, where there is not much intervention from the state about management and
protection of a natural ecosystem (like in the case of the Sheikha Jheel), and communities are well
informed of the benefits and codes of conservation, they leave problems like poaching and urban
invasion to the forest department. This is because public powers are limited only up to the marking
of the ballot paper. After this the community’s will and commands are so badly paralyzed that
they feel handicapped in executing their own orders of resource use. This is why time and again
the people of the conserving community in Sheikha have expressed the desire to have a status
provided to them by the government that would authorize them to check poachers.
Last, but not the least, we feel that the tortuous maze of laws and the slow judicial processes
are to be blamed for obstructing community-based conservation. Community conservation in UP is
suffering in the potholes in the law, as is evident in the case of Guriskaran. The forest is pristine,
the community is aware, and conservation goes hand in hand with development; but because our
laws are framed the way they are, the community is having a tough time enforcing its conservation
measures in its forest. To put the poor peasant through such an ordeal for a cause that is after all
only a moral value for the community makes the peasant succumb more easily to the pressures
of the timber mafia.
We conclude that this is just the right time to put community-based ecosystem maintenance
in a legal framework and mobilize communities towards the scientific management of resources
coupled with traditional wisdom. Problems of poverty, resource crunch and biodiversity depletion
are inextricably intertwined, and hence participatory management seems to be the only answer. It
has been accepted by hardcore scientists too that endangered species cannot be saved without the
will of the people who are co-existing with them, drawing their livelihoods from the same resource
base.
To sum up, in the wake of the undeniable realization that societies are incessantly being allured
by an urbanized life style, it is an imperative to finely integrate conservation with the progress of
a community towards prosperity. Notwithstanding the cultural ethos the younger generations are
drawing impetus only from monetary and social gains. With such downfall of cultural values even
sacred groves may lose their reverence. Thus, not excluding ecosystems with a religious association,
it is time to give due recognition to community conservation and put material rewards at the other
end. There is no barrier that can stop the ill effects of the cash economy from infiltrating into the
systems of the forest dwellers or other ecosystem people living in perfect harmony with nature.
While working on the case studies we found that the trends shown by the generation in the
making are evidence enough. They are struck by the stigma of the new lines of classification that
cleave the society into backward and forward sections in modern terms. Where the conceptual
meaning of backward equals living in a village, being uneducated and not having access to the
latest consumerist goods or a chair in a high office, and forward denotes a public-school education,
state chapter - uttar pradesh

brand-savvy lifestyle and a job that can get things done. Needless to say all the strata of society
nurture the dream to join the latter group. A youth in the village Sheikha told us that now he
has reason enough to protect the heronries and the communal roosts in the village because we
will keep showing up in the village since conservation is what draws a group of urban people
to a remote village. He liked our company because he wanted to be
like us one day. We found such trends to be detrimental for
the tradition of conservation and now the only way is to club
conservation with benefits that may be due to tourism, JFM
or multiple-use protection. Having seen the failures of blanket
protection to declared protected areas due to the non-cooperation
and antagonism of the locals, we can only hope to use these
obstacles as stepping-stones.
692 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

4. Conclusions
The years since 1980 have seen the emergence of many contradictions between the development
process and the need for long-term sustainable use of resource base. There has been a slowing-
down of the rate of diversion of forestlands to other purposes due to an official policy embodied in
the Forest Conservation Act of 1980. It can be thought of in terms of a gradual transformation of
the mode of resource use from foraging for subsistence to processing of commodities. However,
with the state government taking charge of natural ecosystems came the misinterpretation that
forests and other ecosystems such as the grasslands, wetlands and rivers are the property of
the government and it is not the responsibility of the people to conserve them. As the mission
to introduce participation of local communities in ecosystem management moves forward, the
foremost requirement is to make people believe that communities are the born owners of the
forests and other ecosystems. It is in the interest of their long-term benefits to preserve the
ecosystem. In other words, a drive to make history repeat itself is needed because, and so that,
nature conservation is integrated with the very cultural ethics of societies in UP.

The authors are associated with the Wildlife Society of India, Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh.

Endnotes
1
http://www.censusindia.net/t_00_003.html
2
http://www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Religiondata_2001.xls
3
A.K. Singh, Uttar Pradesh Development Report 2000 (Lucknow, New Royal Book Company, 2000).
4
A. Agarwal and S. Narain, Towards Green Villages (New Delhi, Centre for Science and Environment, 1989).
5
M. Mann, 1992. ‘Britische Herschaft auf Indischem Boden: Landwirtschafttiche transformation and Oekologische
Desturbtion des “Central Doab” 1801-1854’ (Stuttgart, 1992), pp. 107-14.
6
S. Beal, Buddhist Records of the Western World (Delhi, Munshiram Manoharlal, 1981).
7
E. Whitcombe, ‘Agrarian conditions in Northern India’ in The United Provinces under British Rule 1866-1869
(Berkeley, California, 1972).
8
S. Swarup, Flora and Fauna in Mughal Art (Bombay, Taraporewala, 1983).
9
R.K. Dube, Vanaspati Adhyatma (Lucknow, Shubham Prakashan, 1995.
10
Editorial note: Unfortunately, the social and political underpinnings of the caste system also made it an extremely
powerful regime of human exploitation and oppression.
11
S. Haywoods, S. Crowe and S. Haywoods, The Garden of Mughal India: A History and a Guide (Delhi, Vikas
1974).
12
R.H. Grove, Green Imperialism: Colonial Expansion, Tropical Island Edens and the Origin of Environmentalism,
1600-1860 (Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1995).
13
A. Rogers, Tuzuk-e-Jahangiri or Memoirs of Jahangir, Edited by Henry Beveridge (New Delhi, Munshiram Manoharlal
(1978).
14
Rajiv Chauhan, ’Gangetic Plains EWG’, National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan process, 1st meeting, Aligarh
Muslim University, Aligarh, March 2001.
15
N.V. Joshi, Uttar Pradesh District Gazetteers: Agra (Lucknow, 1965)
16
J. McKinnon, K. Mackinnon, G. Child and J. Thorsell, Managing Protected Areas in the Tropics (IUCN and Global
Environment Monitoring System, 1986.
17
R.H. Grove, V. Damodaran and S. Sangwan, Nature and the Orient (New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1998).
18
D.L. Drake-Brockman, Azamgarh: A Gazetteer (District Gazetteers of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh,
1911).
19
Anon. 1997. A Study of Sacred Groves of Mathura and Varanasi Districts of U.P. A publicaton of the Regional Center
for National Afforestation and Ecodevelopment Board.
20
(As above).
21
E.T. Atkinson, Statistical Description and Historical Account of the North-Western Provinces of India (North-western
Provinces and Oudh Government Press, 1875).
22
Personal communication with A.A. Khan, Lecturer, Department of Botany, AMU, Aligarh, 2002.
23
Personal communication with Rajiv Kumar, DFO, Aligarh Division, Dept. of Social Forestry, Aligarh, 2000.
24
Ministry of Environment and Forests, New Delhi, D.O. No. 6.21/89-FP dated 1st June, 1990.
 Uttar Pradesh 693
25
Under the provisions of the 1878 Act, each family of ‘rightholders’ was alloted a specific quantum of timber and
fuel, while sale or barter of forest produce was strictly prohibited.
26
M. Gadgil, ‘Ecological organisation of the Indian society’, Vikram Sarabhai Memorial Lecture, ICSSR Newsletter,
XXI (4) (1991).
27
BISR, Social Forestry in India: Problems and Prospects (Birla Institute of Scientific Research: Economic Research
Division, Radiant Publishers, 1986).
28
D.W. Bromley and M.M. Cernea, ‘The Management of Commom Property Natural Resources: Some Conceptual and
Operational Fallacies’, World Bank Discussion Papers (57) (Washington DC, World Bank, 1989).
29
M. Colchester, ‘Sustaining the Forests: The Community based Approach in South and South-East Asia’, Development
and Change, 25 (1) (1994), pp. 69-100.
30
W. Fernandes and S. Kulkarni (eds), Towards a New Forest Policy: Peoples Rights and Environmental Needs
(New Delhi, Indian Social Institute, 1983); W. Fernandes, G. Menon and P. Viegas, Forests, Environment and Tribal
Economy (New Delhi, Indian Social Institute, 1988).
31
R. Guha, ‘Scientific Forestry and Social Change in Uttarakhand’, Economic and Political Weekly, 20/45-7, (1985),
pp. 1932-52.
32
J.E.M. Arnold and J.G. Campbell, ‘Collective Management of Hill Forests in Nepal: The Community Forestry
Development Project’, in Proceedings of the Conference on Common Property Resource Management (Washington
DC, National Academy Press, 1986); P. Dasgupta and K.G. Maler, ‘The Environment and Emerging Development
Issues’, STICERD, working paper No. 28, London School of Economics (1990).
33
F.S. Zuffery, ‘The Nature and Utilization of Grazing Resources in India’, in L.S. Leshnik and G. Sontheimer (eds),
Pastoralists and Nomads in South Asia (Weisbaden, 1986).
34
R. Wade, ‘Common Property Resources: Collective Actions as an Alternative to Privatisation or State Regulation’,
Cambridge Journall of Economics, 11 (1987); D.W. Attawood, Social and Political Preconditions for Successful Co-
opration and Rural Development (Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1988).
35
Taungia is a system of forestry labour in use in colonial times. Taungia villages were villages where the labour was
settled.
36
N.C. Saxena, Forests, People and Profit (Dehradun, Natraj, 1997).

state chapter - uttar pradesh

 CCA/UP/CS1/Aligarh/Amakhera/Species protection

Amakhera village, Aligarh

Background
Amakhera village falls in Gopi taluka of Aligarh district in Uttar Pradesh. Situated 40 km away
from Aligarh city, it is accessible by jeep/taxi. This wetland habitat is typical of the Gangetic plains.
The CCA is 0.5 sq km and each year attracts about 7000 birds belonging to 70 species like Indian
skimmer and the threatened bar-headed geese. The legal status of the protected land is village
commons.
The entire village, mostly comprising of the Hindu Jat community, is involved in the protection of
these birds. The village has a population of around 3,000 and mainly sustains itself on agriculture
and could be considered average economically.

Towards community conservation

This wetland lies very close to the village and has been traditionally used by the villagers for
irrigation as well as fishing purposes. It is not known whether there is any active community
participation of the community in the protection of the birds, although all inhabitants see to it that
no one kills or disturbs birds. The village panchayat is believed to be involved in the process.

Constraints and opportunities faced

The wetland is now facing siltation as well as pollution due to chemical run-off from the adjoining
agricultural fields, which use chemical fertilizers and pesticides.
Students from the Aligarh Muslim University regularly visit the area for studies on waterfowl and
their habitat. This is a good opportunity for the university to make some positive interventions
based on their research and for the villagers to benefit from the results of these studies. True
to this, the fishing practice has been discontinued by the people on request from the Centre for
Wildlife Studies, Aligarh Muslim University, as it was causing disturbance to the birds.

This case study has been contributed by Afiffullah Khan of Wildlife Society of India in 2001, based
on information provided by H.S. Yahya, Dept. of Wildlife Sciences, Aligarh Muslim University.

For more details contact:

Pradhan,
Amakhera village,
Aligarh,
U.P.
case studies - uttar pradesh

Afiffullah Khan
Wildlife Society of India
Department of Wildlife Sciences,
Aligarh Muslim University
Aligarh - 202002
Ph&fax: 09411862686 / 9897180092
Email: afifkhan@rediffmail.com, wsi@nde.vsnl.net.in

695
 CCA/UP/CS2/Aligarh/Daupur/Species protection

Daupur village, Aligarh

Background
The wetland in this village with an area of 1.5 sq km attracts several aquatic birds including
migratory species. Falling in Javan Taluka of Aligarh District in UP, the village has an population of
approximately 4,000. The main source of income of the people is agriculture. The people depend
moderately on this wetland for irrigation, drinking water and fishing purposes. The legal status of
the land is village commons.

Towards community conservation

The main community residing in the village is Hindu jat. This entire community has been
traditionally protecting these visiting birds and sees to it that no one kills or disturbs them. The
gram sabha is believed to be involved in the conservation. This wetland is also regularly visited by
the students of Aligarh Muslim University for conducting studies on bird identification, behavioural
studies and for habitat assessment/ evaluation practices. On their request, the villagers have
discontinued fishing in the wetland.

Constraints and opportunities faced

Though the birds do not face direct threats from the villagers, other factors such as the continuing
expansion of agricultural fields, settlements as well as a road under construction pose a serious
threat to the future of the birds visiting the wetland. The villagers have so far not received any
support from the government for this initiative.

This information is provided by H.S. Yahya, Dept. of Wildlife Sciences, Aligarh Muslim University,
in 2001.

For more details contact:

Pradhan, Daupur,
P.O. Daupur, via Javan,
Aligarh District

H.S. Yahya
Wildlife Society of India
Department of Wildlife Sciences,
case studies - uttar pradesh

Aligarh Muslim University

Aligarh - 202002
Ph/fax: 0571701052

696
 CCA/UP/CS3/Aligarh/Gursikaran/Forest and grassland protection

Gursikaran forest, Aligarh

Background
The Gursikaran Forest is a fine example of
how 20 villages have sustainably managed
their forests. The conserved area covers 440
acres of the scrub forest and Usar1 grasslands
in a saline alkaline soil belt.
The forest falls in Koil Tehsil in Aligarh District
of the Indo-Gangetic plains of UP. The villages
in the area are Talaspur Kalan, Darapur,
Mahuwakhera, Ibrahimabad and Gursikaran.
All these villages share their boundaries with
the forest, but officially it has been under the
ownership of the gram samaj of Gursikaran Fields in front of Gursikaran forest
village. Photo: Afiffullah Khan
A sweeping view of the forest gives the impression of a Prosopis spp.-based scrub forest. A road
cuts through the core area as does the river Sengar. This region is a part of the well-integrated
drainage system of the Ganges, and small tributaries and nallahs also traverse through the area.
Gursikaran is a combination of several habitat types. The major part of the area is occupied by
scrub forest of which ironwood or mesquite, pudding-pipe or shami, khejri, babul, white acacia
and ber are the main constituents. These forests have stretches of dry thorny bushes interspersed
with woody vegetation. The most frequently seen shrub species is karel. Next comes the usar
grasslands, which provide open space for wild as well as domestic animals to forage. The common
grasses are sarkanda, doob, cogon grass, garara, etc. The Sengar river that divides the area into
two parts also supports a small tract of riverine forest on its banks. Many species of birds and
mammals are found here, including six mammalian species and a rich avifauna with both land and
water birds.
There are 20 more villages that use the forest resources but only in a sustainable manner. The
eight villages that have been selected for this case study have a total human population of 55000.
The population of Gurisikaran village itself is about 8000. Societies in all villages are broadly divided
into two classes: upper-caste groups, which includes brahmins and thakurs, and the lower caste
that consist of dhobis, nais, mehtars, kumbars, baghelas, telis, julahes, fakirs, aherias, khatiks and
jatavs. Several nomadic tribes also visit the forest from time to time for various resource benefits.
The main source of income for the people is agriculture and livestock breeding. Some of the major
crops grown here are wheat, corn, gram, mustard, oat, sugarcane, millet and masoor. The total
livestock population in these eight villages is about 50000. Some villagers have also made their
way to the city, working either as labourers at construction sites or taking up office jobs.
The only livelihood purpose that the forest serves is providing pastureland. The lower classes of
the village also rely on the forest for fuelwood. Apart from this, babul timber is used to make small
case
case studies

furniture and for poles. There is no commercial dependence on the forest. There are two temples
within the forest and the forests are used as grounds for congregations. Although this is not a
studies -- uttar

sacred grove the locals wish to protect the forest for religious reasons too.
At present, the legal status of the entire forest is under dispute. The case between the gram
sabha and the official owners, the Central Dairy Farm (CDF), is lying with the Revenue Board. In
future, if the case is decided in favour of the gram sabha, they plan to protect it as a multiple-use
uttar pradesh

protected area.
Historically, the Gursikaran forest has changed hands several times during and since the British
pradesh

Regime. As per the records, in 1933 it was declared a reserved forest. In less than 15 years it was
handed over to the Animal Husbandry Department. Once again, in less than 10 years a portion
of it was given to the Agriculture Department. By 1950, the entire forest was given on a 30-year
lease to United Project Dairy. After the commencement of the lease, the forest was given to the
697
698 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

gram sabha but by 1984 AFPRO (Action for Food Production)2 projects were made operational and
activities like dairy farming, land reclamation and plantation were initiated with the purpose of
enhancing foodgrain and milk production and to provide employment opportunities to the villagers.
This project, despite being limited to seven years, extended illegally till 1998. After the removal of
AFPRO, the forest went back to Central Dairy Farm. The locals who were given jobs under it were
now jobless and the infrastructure is now degraded. The CDF decided to clear the forest and give
the land to the ganna vibhag (sugarcane department) for agriculture. In 2000 it struck a deal with
the contractors to take the timber away for a mere Rs 16.5 lakh.

Towards community conservation

During all these changes of hands, the rights of the local people were not disturbed and they
continued to extract fuelwood and NTFPs from the woods on a small scale. The locals do not recall
any such date when they started to conserve the wildlife. They have lived with the belief that
the wildlife is an integral part of the ecosystem and deserves protection. As a tradition they have
inherited from their ancestors, they just leave the forest alone be and see to it that no external
harm is inflicted on the ecosystem.
The course of action is oriented by the thumb rule of not harvesting more than the forest can
regenerate. Lately, the influx of city poachers has instigated the community to keep a watch-and-
ward system alive that would immediately call for action against poachers. On one alarm call for
the presence of a hunter, the entire community gathers with lathis in hands to prevent damage
to wildlife. The increasing nilgai or blue bull population sometimes damages standing crops but
the villagers do not attempt to kill them as the cow is sacred amongst the Hindus. Tufts of high
grasses, which are used as cover by ground-nesting birds, are carefully kept cleared off to protect
them from the practice of burning grasses to obtain a fresh flush of grasses with high protein
content. These grasses are used to feed their cattle for a better milk yield.
Minor conflicts over resource sharing between individuals have been solved amicably by the
gram panchayat. The initiative demanded a tough battle only when the forest was returned to the
CDF, which decided to sell it off to contractors. The fear of losing their age-old heritage alarmed
the community in Gurisikaran village and they rose to oppose the cutting of the forest.
The villagers learnt that the cutting was legalized and had commenced under police protection
and the gram panchayat decided that they had no option but to turn to the district administration
and the forest department for help. Unfortunately, they too could not provide help since the paper
work for this destruction was firmly in place. It was then that the villagers filed a case with the
Revenue Board and constituted an NGO named Bhu Mukti Jan Sangharsh Samiti. Meanwhile,
the DFO found a way to stop the forest from being cut down. He exercised his power to stop a
forest from being altered if it holds the status of the forest according to the dictionary meanings.
Several meetings were called for at the district magistrate’s office to discuss the issue. The CDF
representative failed to appear at these meetings and the forest continued to be cut. The people
of Gursikaran decided to stage a dharna outside the District Magistrate’s office which turned into a
hunger strike. At this, actions were expedited and orders were given that unless the pending case
is resolved, any cutting at the site will be considered illegal.
All expenses to fight the case are being totally borne by the villagers themselves. Each villager
has contributed a certain amount to the gram pradhan who has constituted the Bhu Mukti Jan
Sangharsh Samiti and all steps taken to fight the legal owner are taken under his supervision.

Impacts of community effort

The people of Gursikaran believe that they have better agricultural produce because of the rich
biodiversity in the forest. The presence of birds like
grey francolin and black francolin in the open scrub
forest reduces with use of pesticides. Within the
forest they have a good pastureland to maintain
livestock free of any input, and this gives them an
employment opportunity as well as a better economic
status. The model resource use in Gursikaran is an
excellent example of a village making an attempt
to come out of ecological poverty to fight back rural
poverty, and impacts are showing on the improved
economic status of the village.
Sengar river, Gursikaran Photo: Afifullah Khan
 Uttar Pradesh 699

Due to the conservation provided by the villagers to the habitat and individual species, it has
been possible for wildlife, otherwise extinct from other areas, to thrive in the forest. Clearing land
for agriculture and felling trees for timber has not yet lured the community for short-term gains
and the forest still remains in a very good state.

Constraints
Within the communities there have been no differences and all stand united to save their forest.
However, when the orders for stopping the cutting of trees was given, an upper caste from the
neighboring village withdrew its support. This may be because the contractor is related to some
people in that caste group.
Another huge hurdle is that those genuinely interested in the conservation are largely uneducated
and lack the expertise of baffling lengthy paperwork. The political pressure is being felt by the
people who believe that that some MLAs have a nexus with the timber mafia with the aim of
gaining monetarily from it. When political support was offered after the demonstration made local
news, it was turned down by the community as they did not want political colour added to their
struggle.

Written by Afiffullah Khan, Wildlife Society of India, Department of Wildlife Sciences, Aligarh
Muslim University, with inputs from Pravendra Singh Sisodia, a resident of Gursikaran village,
in 2001.

For more details contact:

Mr. Gopal Singh,
Gram Pradhan (Village Head), Gursikaran,
Dhaniapur, Aligarh 202 002

Gramanchal Vikas Santha, Ramghat Rd.

Quarsi, Aligarh 202 002.

Pravendra Singh Sisodia

Utsahi Swayanm Sahayata Santha,
PO Gursikaran, Aligarh 202 002

Afiffullah Khan
Wildlife Society of India
Department of wildlife Sciences,
Aligarh Muslim, University
Aligarh - 202002
Phone & fax: 09411862686 / 9897180092
Email: afifkhan@rediffmail.com, wsi@nde.vsnl.net.in
case studies - uttar pradesh

Endnotes
1
Usar is a type of soil that exists in the Gursikaran forest. These tracts are slippery and consist of white glistening
soil called reh in the local language.
2
See http://afpro.org/
 CCA/UP/CS 4/Aligarh/Sheikha/Conservation of wetland

Sheikha Jheel, Aligarh

Background
Sheikha Jheel is a lake situated 17 km from Aligarh (Uttar Pradesh) on Aligarh Jalali road near
village Sheikha. It falls in the Koil tehsil of Aligarh district. The Upper Ganga canal flows adjacent
to the lake. The lake and the village are less than a kilometer away from the Sheikha village bus-
stop. The total area of the lake is 25 ha.
This Jheel came into existence after the formation of the Upper Ganga Canal in 1852. It is a
fresh water perennial water body surrounded by agricultural fields on two sides. The Upper Ganga
Canal divides the lake into two parts. The area receives moderate rainfall up to a maximum
of 644 mm. The lake and its surrounding areas support a diversity of habitats, viz. wetland,
grassland, forest etc. The wetland forms an ideal habitat for the waterfowl and other water birds
especially during the winter months. Among the flora the dominant tree species that surround
the lake are Terminalia arjuna and Syzigium cumunii. The other components of the vegetation
include acacias, Dalbergia sissoo, neem, among others. The major weeds include Lantana camara,
Sida, Parthenium hysterophorus and Cassia tora. The shrub species include Ipomea aquatica and,
Muraya koenigi. Only a few mammalian species are found in the area like the blue bull, blackbuck,
five stripped squirrel, Indian mongoose, black-napped hare, rhesus monkey and jackal. About 166
water bird species have been reported in and around Sheikha. Some of these include, the great
crested grebe, painted stork, barheaded goose, purple heron, and so on.
Bhavavankhera and Sheikha are two villages that fall in the vicinity of the lake. The other villages
are Edalpur, Changeri, Jalali, Gangary and Panaithi. The total population of Sheikha village is more
than a 1000 comprising mainly of Rajputs and Jatavas. Agriculture is the sole source of income
of the people with a mixed population of rich farmers who own tractors and other agricultural
equipments and poorer peasants who either work in other people’s fields or own small pieces
of land. The major crops grown in the vicinity of the lake are paddy and wheat. Some farmers
also grow sugarcane, maize and mustard. The lake is used by the people for cultivation of water
chestnut and small scale fishing. The area around the lake is also used for grazing of domestic
cattle.
During summers, there is less water in the lake and some ground vegetation grows. The villagers
graze their cattle continuously during this time so as to prevent it from turning into a terrestrial
ecosystem. Till 1952, the villagers used to depend on the lake for agriculture. Since the construction
of the Ganga Canal, their dependency on the lake has become negligible.
Impacts of past and current land uses:
1. De facto cultivation of water chestnut in one part of the lake covers most of the water surface.
This has resulted in less surface area for the birds to forage. However all care has been taken
to leave a considerable part of the wetland for use by wild waterfowl.
2. The FD planted some trees of Tamarix sp. and Prosopis sp. on the canal banks under various
social forestry programs which produced a good forest. Later, when this land was distributed
amongst the Scheduled caste and other backward classes (dispreviledged sections), under a
case studies - uttar pradesh

government scheme, the gram samaj (village council) ordered the felling of these trees which
led to the vanishing of the wildlife that had developed here. The conserving community holds a
grudge against the government for this.
3. A tar road constructed along one side of the lake has rendered it an easy access for outside
poachers.
4. In 1991, the District administration built mounds in the middle of the lake and a trail in the lake
leading to the mound. This restricted the flow of water. Subsequently, these mounds and the
mud road were left unattended, causing siltation and making the wetland shallower.
5. Water hyacinth grows here profusely causing eutrophication and hence fewer surfaces for the
birds to use.

700
 Uttar Pradesh 701

Legally, the jheel comes under the village common land and gram samaj has the ownership
rights. The forest department’s social forestry wing had carried out some plantations on the canal
banks about ten years ago. These plantations come under reserved forests of the region and have
been closed for hunting under the Wild Life Protection Act (1972). Also, plantations were carried
out on the area on Ganga canal banks by Ganga Canal Department. Presently this area is also
cultivated under the social forestry program and comes under protected forests.

Towards community conservation

The villagers are dependent on the lake and the surrounding area for their livelihood. The
community uses the lake area for grazing, for fuel wood and fodder collection. During summers
when water in the lake recedes, the grass and other vegetation grows on the exposed area. This
is a very important source of green fodder for the villagers. The water chestnut grown also acts as
an important means of subsistence.
Although the local people do not attach any religious association with the jheel, the lake is a
precious matter of pride for the natives. Another important motive behind conserving the lake is to
maintain the water table of the area for agriculture. Local people have also understood importance
of the lake as wildlife habitat and refuge for migratory birds. They believe that their own future will
be threatened if the natural resources around them perish. In 1986, Aligarh Muslim University’s
Wildlife Sciences Department, while conducting research and carrying out ecological monitoring of
the area, also fostered scientific awareness about the importance of the lake among the villagers.
This was further nurtured by a couple of local NGOs.
Due to the nature of the initiative (villagers’ and FD’s combined efforts) both village and forest
department have decision making powers as far as conserved area is concerned. Gram samaj
along with the two local NGOs takes the major decision and is also responsible for the protection
of the wetland and the forests surrounding the wetland.
The area comes under the ownership of the gram samaj of Sheikha and Bhavan Khera villages.
The gram samaj designs all the management strategies. All the sections of the local community
are involved in the conservation initiative. Apart from Sheikha, the villagers of Bhavan Khera and
Changeri are actively participating in the conservation efforts for preservation of the wetland.
The traditional rules for agriculture and wildlife that are observed by the community in the
Sheikha are governed by the motive of preserving the habitat. Some of the rules that are observed
by the community are as follows
• Only small portion of the lake is used for the cultivation of the water chestnut
• The villagers have avoided plantations on the bank of the lake, as it may prove harmful to
wetland habitat.
• The villagers do not cultivate on land that gets submerged as such practice may alter the ecological
succession.
• No draining of the lake water, for any purpose.
• No hunting of waterfowls or any of the birds and animals is permitted. The villagers have been
known to draw swords against a particular nomadic tribe, Kanjar because these tribals visit the
lake in the night and poach important wildlife such as otters, porcupine and turtles in the lake
area.
case studies - uttar pradesh

Small conflicts are handled at the village level but larger conflicts are handled by the government
bodies like the division of social forestry and the revenue department.
All castes within the community are involved in the conservation of the lake and its biodiversity.
A few exceptions to total protection are when the youngsters help poachers for the sake of money.
When the poacher is related either to some elderly or influential member of the community no
action is taken on account of pressure by community members.
In 1997 when wrong restoration policies were implemented in the lake the Sheikha community
stood up and united against them. A memorandum was submitted with the ‘Haritima Environmental
Group’ to the District Magistrate to stop construction of the road around the lake because it delimits
the wetland and gives easy access to poachers.
In 2001, when poaching took a massive toll of birds, a signature campaign in the village conducted
by Department of Wildlife Sciences appealed to the District Magistrate to take action for putting
practical moratorium on waterfowl shooting. The community has also decided to file a PIL against
702 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

those interventions of the government. that are conducive to vandalism.

Financially, the initiative is totally self sustained and does not receive any financial support from
any agency. In case the lake is developed as a picnic spot there will be enhanced employment
opportunities and consequently an improved economic status.

Impacts of community conservation

The local community is benefited by this conservation in many ways.
1. Assured regular supply of fodder, grass and fuel wood.
2. A portion of the wetland which is used for the cultivation of water chestnuts, is one of the
sources of livelihood for some of the communities around the village earns their revenue from
it.
3. Assured availability of natural resources for all villages surrounding the lake.
The habitat has balanced ecological elements like soil moisture, ground water table etc. Certain
species of the ecosystem have regenerated and an increase in the biological diversity of the
lake, and surrounding areas has been reported. The protection and conservation efforts by the
local community have immensely benefited the wetland ecosystem and surrounding habitats such
as grassy patches and forests. Hence it has become ideal wildlife refuge and supports highest
diversity and numbers of waterfowls.

Costs incurred by the community for conservation

1. Plantation of trees on the banks gives a lot of revenue but the villagers have decided against
such plantations since it is harmful for the health of the wetland.
2. The increasing population of blue bulls around the fields is causing damage to the crops. The
community does not kill the bulls themselves due to the sense of respect that they have for
these creatures but allow other hunters to kill them.

Constraints
1. One of the major constraints is relation of the villagers with FD and law enforcement agencies.
At certain times the villagers have caught poachers red-handed while hunting. When the matter
was taken to police they were highly disappointed due to apathy shown by them. The community
has grudges against the government machinery and the way it functions.
2. Most of the population of Sheikha village is uneducated and suffer from a lack of confidence
which hinders them from stopping savvy city dweller from poaching. They also lack awareness
regarding the potentials of community conservation and need proper guidance and support
from the official machinery.

Recommendations 1

These recommendations are in total accordance with the community and have been formulated
into a management plan submitted to the District Magistrate in 1997.
It proposes that:
1. The lake should be declared as ‘Salim Ali Waterfowl Refuge’ where people are allowed to exercise
their traditional rights.
2. Grazing should be encouraged on the fringes so that the aquatic ecosystem does not turn into
a terrestrial habitat.
3. Eradication of the water hyacinth which is the main culprit in the destruction of the wetland and
Ipomea carnea which grows on the banks.
4. If the lake is developed into a picnic spot, the community should be given some kind of revenue
for its conservation efforts and also associated employment opportunities.
 Uttar Pradesh 703

5. The community should be organized into a committee such as the van suraksha samiti in
order to overcome their handicap against city poachers under the guidance and support of the
government. This would help bring a sense of self- confidence in them.
All the above recommendations have been lying with the district administration and no action
has been taken.
Some of the NGOs involved in the initiative are Haritima Environmental Group, Aligarh, Bombay
Natural History Society, Wildlife Society of India and Dept of Wildlife Sciences, Aligarh Muslim
University, Aligarh.

This case study was contributed by Afiffullah Khan, Wildlife Society of India, Department of
Wildlife Sciences, Aligarh Muslim University, with inputs from Layak Singh, a resident of Sheikha
village in 2002.

For further information contact:

Munni Devi,
Gram Pradhan
Village Edalpur,
Gram Post Tilakhana,
Aligarh 202001, U.P.

Secretary,
Haritima Environmental
Action Group, Aligarh

Mr. Layak Singh, Retd. Rail Guard,

Gram Sheikha, Gram Post Jalali,
Aligarh 202001 U.P.

Dept. of Wildlife Sciences

Aligarh Muslim University
Aligarh 202002 U.P.

Afiffullah Khan
Wildlife Society of India
Department of wildlife Sciences,
Aligarh Muslim, University
Aligarh - 202002
Phone & fax: 09411862686 / 9897180092
Email: afifkhan@rediffmail.com, wsi@nde.vsnl.net.in
case studies - uttar pradesh

Endnotes
1
Recommendations made by Wildlife Society of India and Haritima Environmental Group.
Uttarakhand
Uttarakhand
Darab J. Nagarwalla and Rakesh Agrawal

1. Background
1.1. Geographic profile
Uttarakhand (28°44’ and 31°28’ N and 77°35’
and 81°01’ E) came into existence as the 27th
state of the Republic of India on 9 November
2000. It was carved out from the state of Uttar
Pradesh, separating out the hill regions with a
geographical area of 53,483sq.km constituting
1.63 per cent of the land area of the country
(FSI, 1999). The state has 13 districts and is
sub-divided into 49 tehsils and 95 development
blocks. These community development blocks are
further divided into 673 nyay panchayats (legal
councils) covering 15,669 villages. Uttarkashi,
Chamoli and Pithoragarh Districts share an
international boundary in the north with Tibet,
while Pithoragarh, Champavat and Udham Singh
Nagar share a boundary with Nepal.
The high-altitude mountain ranges of the state
are perpetually snow-covered and are perennial
sources of water not only for the state but also
for much of the rest of northern India. Four
major river systems of the country—the Ganga,
Yamuna, Ramganga and Sharada—originate
here.
The state is also home to a number of Hindu
holy shrines including Badrinath, Kedarnath,
Gangotri, Yamunotri, Hemkunt Sahib, the Panch
Kedars, Panch Badri and the Panch Prayags,
earning for itself the name Dev Bhoomi (Abode
of the Gods). Rich terai and middle Himalayan forest, best rep-
resented in Corbett National Park
Photo: Ashish Kothari

1.2. Demographic profile

The Census of India, 2001 (Provisional), estimates the total population of the state at 8.47
million people, of which 4.31 million are male and 4.13 million are females. The state ranks 20th
in terms of population and 18th in terms of total geographic area. There has been a decline in the
decadal growth rate of the population in the districts of the state from 24.23 per cent to 19.20 per
state chapter - uttarakhand

cent, which is lower than the all-India decadal population growth rate of 21.23 per cent. At 964,
the sex ratio in Uttarakhand is better than the all-India ratio of 933, and shows a considerable
increase from the figure of 936 in 1991. Literacy in the state has risen significantly from 57.75
per cent in 1991 to 72.28 per cent in 2001, of which male literacy accounts for 84.01 per cent,
while female literacy is slightly below the national average (65.38 per cent) at 60.26 per cent.
Quite a sizeable number of villages have very low populations, located in remote and relatively
inaccessible areas.

1.3. Ecological profile

The state of Uttarakhand can be broadly divided into a number of topographical regions:
• The plains of Haridwar, Udham Singh Nagar and Dehra Dun districts
• The Bhabar and Terai areas of Dehradun, Garhwal and Nainital
707
708 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

• The Middle Himalayan region

• The Higher Himalayas
• The Trans Himalayas
The plains of the state are endowed with rich and fertile soil, while the hills are characterised by
undulating and rugged topography with varied climate, soil texture, limited land for cultivation,
preponderance of scattered and marginal land holdings, terrace farming and higher unit cost of
infrastructure development.
The major area of the state is under forests followed by agriculture (see Table 1). As the terrain
and topography of the state is largely hilly with large areas under snow cover and steep slopes,
a substantial portion of land cover is not accessible for agriculture. The farming system in the
hills has a number of characteristic features such as inaccessibility, fragility and diversity, a great
variety of crops including perennial fruit as well as fodder, and different species of livestock. On the
whole, the approach for land use in the Uttarakhand should not be agriculture versus forestry but
agriculture with forestry. At present, less than 5 per cent of the geographical area in Uttarakhand
has forest-cover densities over 60 per cent.1

Table 1: Land use in Uttarakhand, 1996-972

No. Land use /Land cover Area ha. Per cent reporting area

1 Reported area for land use purposes 5,595,939 100

2 Area under forest 3,499,687 62.54
3 Barren and Uncultivable land 299,608 5.36
Land use for purposes other than
4 163,836 2.93
agriculture
5 Cultivable waste 320,228 5.72
6 Permanent pasture and grazing land 227,398 4.06
7 Other land under tree /grooves/Misc. 218,817 3.91
8 Current fallow 11,423 0.20
9 Other fallow 67,659 1.21
10 Net area sown 787,283 14.07

1.4. Socio-economic profile

Forest produce has historically played a significant role in the economy of the region since ancient
times. Classical writers like Pliny mention spikenard, costus root and lycium collected from forests
and bugyaals (alpine grasslands) of Uttarakhand being brought to Rome, where they were in high
demand, and bartered for other articles of commerce. Several items are mentioned in Mughal
chronicles as being traded with the princely states of the plains at that time.3
Uttarakhand’s tremendous natural wealth somehow continued to sustain the people over the
first 60-70 years of British rule. Even after 50 years of depredation caused by the company Raj,
the villagers continued to prosper on the residual bounty. In 1885 Hunter reported in the Imperial
Gazetteer: ‘…people have grown rich in later years…they keep more cattle and get more manure…
rice and mandua are in surplus.’
In 1869 when famine conditions prevailed in the adjacent Bijnore district, Garhwali peasants
earned handsome profit by way of a vast export of grain to the scarcity-hit areas. The surplus
was documented till 1881 and was being exported both to Bijnore and Tibet. Peasants paid their
revenue in cash and indeed it was one of the few districts where revenue could be collected with
such ease. Even in 1910 the Garhwal Gazetteer noted that ‘miscellaneous earnings of hill men were
high through the sale of ghee, woollen goods, and carrying loads by ponies, mules and goats.’
Today the major occupation in Uttarakhand is agriculture, although the net cultivated area is only
14.07 per cent, of which 22.4 per cent falls in Udham Singh Nagar and Haridwar districts. 49 per
 Uttarakhand 709

cent of holdings are less than 0.5 ha and 21.51 per cent holdings are
between 0.5 and 1 ha. Thus over 70 per cent holdings are marginal
in nature with an average size of about 0.37 ha. These small land
holdings coupled with the rugged terrain makes agriculture an unviable
option as a full-time occupation. According to tentative estimates,
the per capita gross state domestic product was calculated at about
Rs 15323 in 1996-97, which is higher than the national average
of Rs 12805. Similarly, per capita net state domestic product in
Uttarakhand (Rs 13710) was above the national average (Rs 11,434).
However according to a survey conducted by the Rural Development
Department, about 36.44 per cent of rural families were living below the poverty line.
Uttarakhand is today considered to be a backward area, dependent on a ‘money-order economy’,
where only a few families out of every hundred can still feed themselves from the produce of their
own fields, while the vast majority are wholly dependent on the ration shops of an inefficient and
corrupt Public Distribution System. On an average, each energy unit of agronomic yield (including
milk) entails an expenditure of 12 energy units from village support systems and their adjacent
forests. This massive input of energy at present only satisfies 50 per cent of the food needs. The
rest has to be imported from the plains. In a recent survey, unirrigated cropland soil fertility was
measured to be between 12.5 and 25.0 per cent of that of undisturbed forest, in spite of massive
input of manure.4 The energy value of the inputs was calculated to be 1.5 of the agronomic yield
or about 70 per cent of total crop yield including residues.5 This just goes to show how difficult
it is to maintain good cropland productivity in the region even with massive inputs, all of which
come directly or indirectly through adjoining forests and the rearing of cattle. As forests degrade,
it becomes harder and harder to provide these inputs. Productivity drops and agriculture becomes
economically unviable on small and marginal holdings, facilitating widespread migration to urban
areas in search of jobs, and hence the ‘money-order economy’.

2. A brief history of administrative control over land and

resources
The Gorkhas of Nepal invaded Kumaon and Garhwal in 1804 and were driven out only after the
Gorkha Wars of 1815. Before the Gorkha invasion different parts of Kumaon and Garhwal were
administered by a few independent princely states. The British captured Dehradun and reinstated
the Maharaja of Tehri. However, as payment for services rendered, they annexed more than
half of his territories, naming this region British Garhwal, which became part of the British-
administered Kumaon Division. The rest constituted the Tehri Riyasat,6 under the direct control
of the maharaja. British Garhwal was administered along similar lines to the rest of the Kumaon
division, while the riyasat functioned according to the traditional rule of the Parmar dynasty.
From here on, the histories of the two regions diverge, including their forest management and
conservation, and we consider them separately in the following sections.

2.1. The pre-colonial Tehri-Garhwal Riyasat7

Both the Garhwal rajas and the Gorkhali Government had derived considerable revenue from
various items of forest produce grown in the Dun and adjacent hills. This was usually collected as
a transit duty and was levied on every article of commerce entering or leaving the Dun. The total
collected in 1809-10 through these duties was Rs 16,000.8
state chapter - uttarakhand

The history of large-scale resource exploitation from Tehri Garhwal can be traced back to 1840,
when the maharaja leased a large area of the Bhagirathi valley to Frederick ‘Pahari’ Wilson, a
resourceful entrepreneur, to exploit for forest produce including musk, monal pheasant feathers,
animal hides, fuelwood, timber, etc. This was the first monopoly lease of its kind in the region,
and represents the first step towards the development of what should be called the rise of ‘anti-
conservation’ attitudes amongst the people of Uttarakhand. In 1850, the maharaja renewed
Wilson’s lease till 1864, giving him monopoly rights over commercial felling of deodar and chir in
the Bhagirathi valley. Timber had never been exploited as a commercial raw material for profit
before Wilson’s lease. The fact that the maharaja was quite unaware of the value of timber can
be understood by the astonishing sum Wilson paid for the monopoly timber-harvesting lease: just
Rs 400.9 Wilson pioneered the technique of rolling timber down slopes and floating logs down the
river to a depot at Haridwar. The Railways, happy to have him supply sleepers for their expansion
needs, even appointed him as the Official Contractor.
710 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

As the maharaja became alive to the commercial value of his forests, he began to follow a pattern
of wholesale exploitation similar to the British in neighbouring British Garhwal and Kumaon. After
the expiry of Wilson’s second lease in 1864, the government of the North West Frontier Provinces
(NWFP) leased the same forests from the maharaja, and also opened up the extensive chir forests
of the Tons river valley. In 1885, the riyasat established its own forest department (FD) with
personnel on deputation from the state. The maharaja had become aware of the economic value
of his forests after seeing Wilson’s profits. Fire protection was initiated in deodar and chir forests
for the first time.
In 1897, the riyasat introduced systematic forestry techniques, marked by the demarcation of
the vast tracts of the mixed deciduous forests at Shivpuri that was completed in 1907. All further
cultivation was prohibited, and lopping and felling was restricted, leading to repeated rebellions
(see later). In 1908, three categories of forests were created, Class III Reserved Forests that were
commercially valuable, Class II Protected Forests, which were kept aside for regeneration, and
Class I Village Forests, which were mainly barren clear-felled patches with hardly any or no trees
at all.
Between 1928 and 1929, at the invitation of the Durbar, Dr. Franz Heske, a German forestry
expert came to inspect the riyasat forests and left detailed reports about future management,
suggesting laws to be passed for the protection of wildlife on land, in rivers and streams.10 In 1938,
fire protection measures were enforced in all riyasat forests. By 1940, the present forest divisions
were created, and manpower for forest management recruited.

2.2. The colonial era

2.2.1. Management of forest resources by the state
We identify two distinct phases of British forest policy: (i) an exploitative phase between 1818
and 1859, when the forests of Uttarakhand were controlled by the East India Company, and (ii)
a period of ‘conservancy and scientific management’ that began with the replacement of the
Company by Crown Rule in 1858. In 1868 an Imperial forest department of the North West Frontier
Provinces was established.
Commercial timber harvesting in the sub-Himalayan forests of this region began in 1840, with
the development of the railways around Haridwar and Najibabad. Thereafter, sustained pressures
decimated large tracts of forests in the region, fed by the demands of the construction needs of the
Upper Ganga Canal, establishment of large timber markets in Haridwar, Saharanpur and Meerut,
a major spurt in railway expansion after the revolt of 1857, and the two World Wars.
The exploitative phase
The submontate sal forests of the foothills were exploited in the early years of British dominion.11
Only after the thick jungles of the foothills had been denuded did the attention of the British
authorities turn to the immensely rich deodar forests located in the higher Himalayan ranges.12 The
first attempt at conservancy came in 1826, just three years after the famous ‘saal assi bandobast’,
the first major land settlement where private lands were surveyed, mapped and demarcated on
paper for the first time (see Section 2.3 for details). Traill, the British commissioner, excluded
an area of thaplas (terrace land) in the sub-Himalayan tracts of Kumaon division from the lease
system of forest produce to conserve timber and bamboo, and reserved this area. But this did not
last long. No attempt was made to establish any system of conservancy and the old system of
leasing out the forest dues to contractors was continued. Examination of old British administrative
records, interaction with the residents of present-day village communities in Kumaon and Garhwal
and direct observations on the state of the forests, all lead one to conclude that the political, social
and economic crisis that we see today in the Uttarakhand region is clearly the
legacy of British colonial rule. The origins of the crises are exploitative colonial
policies based on the extreme conceit of the conqueror, and a Western
urban-industrial model of development that views nature as a mere
commodity to be exploited for financial gain.
Conceit is illustrated in the statement of Job Becket, Deputy Collector of
Kumaon, speaking on the Kumaon Iron Works having leased 400sq.miles
of virgin oak forest for fuelwood exploitation in 1868: ‘No doubt such
iron foundries have been found to be very destructive in Britain in the
past where they were legally banned by the 16th century. However such
action is deemed neither possible nor desirable here. And even if such
laws were to be passed, for whom would these forests be preserved?’13
 Uttarakhand 711

This statement implies that vast stretches of forest in Uttarakhand were totally uninhabited and
unused by local communities, which is far from reality. At this point in the state’s history, annual
profits derived from forestry operations were about Rs 0.18 million. With the introduction of a
regular forest establishment in 1855, revenues rose enormously,14 but unfortunately even then
no system of conservancy was attempted. Between 1853 and 1858, one Captain Reid and a
mysterious Mr. Finn were put in charge of the foothill forests of both Garhwal and Kumaon. The
forests of the Ramganga valley, South Patli Dun and Sonali were, according to Major Pearson, the
first conservator of the NWFP, ‘…felled to desolation by Capt. Reid as well as by Mr. Finn, and the
native contractors before him, but perhaps even this does not give an idea of the waste that has
occurred, and the mischief that has been committed. Thousands of trees were felled which were
never removed, nor was their removal possible; and a large revenue has been realized during the
last few years by allowing passes to the people of the lower country to cut up and remove the dead
timber on the payment of a royalty.’15
Major Pearson’s views were implemented thoroughly in the region, and it is worth noting his
example of the prescriptions and the results of scientific forestry. He states: ‘...I have now been
in the habit of watching sal forests for about ten years and the inspection of these Doons very
much confirms the opinion to which my mind has for some years been tending—viz., that both
for the free generation of the seed, and the effectual reproduction of the forest, as well as for the
welfare of the trees, and their progress afterwards, sal requires a considerable amount of sun and
light and that a al forest will bear, and indeed repay (if it does not absolutely require) much more
liberal felling than almost any other description of forest in India…[I have] no hesitation in saying
that if half the trees were cut down in the untouched portion of the Palein forests as well as in the
Mondhal and Nindhore valleys, the remainder would benefit beyond all calculations by operation.’
Nanda summarizes this phase of British Forestry thus: ‘Ignorance can excuse many a crime,
but British foresters were well aware of the role played by broad-leaved forests in the Himalayan
ecosystem—and yet they advocated the reckless destruction of broad-leaved species for short-
term financial gain, leaving the Himalayas to their inevitable fate. Since villagers depended on
these broad-leaved forests for their livelihoods and sustenance, with their rapid disappearance
through systematic girdling, even the remnants of oak forests along mountain streams came to
be eventually lopped to extinction. This ultimately led to the situation that prevails today marked
by widespread water scarcity and drought—a scarcity that has, in turn, completely destroyed the
agricultural system of the hills.…Through reckless destruction of broad-leaved forests undertaken
by government fiat, the British government not only destroyed the ecosystem and local economy,
it also failed in its avowed objective of advancing the monoculture of [commercial species].’16
The ‘scientific’ forestry phase
‘Scientific’ forest management introduced by the Crown aped European production forestry
models and was based on conjecture and economic interests rather than any long-term study and
scientific hypothesis. Couched in the language of ‘conservancy and protection’, these management
systems were made palatable to the educated mind. The Superintendent of the Doon, one Mr.
Williams, described the situation thus: ‘…everyone continued to hack and hew away as they
pleased. Fine trees from 100-200 years old still abounded in the district. All these fell before the
axe and probably the rest would have gone with them had the roads been better’.17 In 1860 forest
revenues began to drop, and had by 1868 plunged to Rs 23,332. Between 1855 to about 1908,
the sal forest tract of the sub-Himalayan belt of Uttar Pradesh had alone yielded well over Rs 1.5
crore (15 million) to the imperial exchequer.18
In 1858, one Colonel Ramsay took over as Commissioner of Kumaon. He prohibited the felling of
trees and appointed forest officers to supervise management operations. He banned grazing and
state chapter - uttarakhand

curtailed rights to use long-established chhaans (cattle stations) in the foothill forests in 1861-62,
which had been totally worked out and hardly contained any valuable timber. These regulations
lasted a decade, after which the new forest department took over. Attempts at conservancy
continued ad hoc until the first Working Plan was prepared in 1881 for the North Patli Dun forests.
These working plans systematized and institutionalised restrictions on traditional rights initiated
almost fifty years earlier. On the other hand there appear to have been no restrictions on hunting
and fishing as long as leases were obtained. Even dynamiting of rivers to stun fish appears to
have been ignored if not condoned by the administration. This strongly indicates that the colonial
government’s efforts at conservation were largely restricted to species of commercial value.
Targets for timber harvesting were two main species: chir and deodar. Both were initially felled
from accessible and later from far-flung areas, and then sought to be spread across the region
at the expense of the broad-leaved climax forests (dominated by oak species) that ‘…protect the
myriads of mountain streams which go to maintain the village sera (fertile irrigated fields used for
paddy) and the water system of the hills which in turn goes to feed the Gangetic canal.’19
712 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

2.2.2. Changes in land-use and cover

In 1882, Atkinson wrote of the region, ‘…Many parts have been permanently injured, the land
where once fine sal forests stood is now too denuded by exposure to admit of reproduction.’20
In 1899, E.P Dansey, Conservator, Garhwal Forest Division wrote: ‘…over much of the Working
Circle a soil which, from the dimensions of the standing trees we see, must have been very rich
originally, has since then undergone deterioration through denudation which has been brought
about by excessive felling and long exposure to the sun.’21 Dansey reported only 36sq.miles out
of 79sq.miles that appeared to have soils suitable for good forest vegetation. He also noticed
considerable frost damage to young sal poles on colder aspects. By the 1930s, large areas had
been specially designated Frosted Sal Working Circles with special prescriptions for nursing and
care in the Landsdowne Forest Division.22
Successive Working Plans in the 1920s and 1930s for the Landour Cantonment Forests of
Mussoorie suggested that the best oak forests be converted to deodar plantations, in part because
the forest officer in charge, one E.C. Mobbs, decided that the timber needs of the British community
for building could be met locally this way. Other oak forests on steep slopes were prescribed to be
managed with a ‘coppice and standards’ system. The author of the next working plan, one O.E.
Osmaston, remarked that building timber was freely available from Dehradun, while fuelwood
and charcoal were in short supply for local residents. He concluded that the oak forests of the
cantonment should not have been tampered with, and instead have been managed on a lopping
rotation for fuelwood generation. Deodar plantations at the scale taken up had been entirely
unnecessary!
Despite having acknowledged the importance of broad-leaved forests in the region, another
forest officer, A.E. Osmaston, proceeded to give detailed instructions for the systematic girdling and
encouragement of excessive lopping of broad-leaved species. This was to hasten their extinction
and allow plantations and regeneration of chir to take over the area. Only narrow strips of broad-
leaved forest were to be left along each mountain khala (stream) or rauli (ravine)23. The results of
this ‘error of judgement’ continue to contribute to the scarcity of good fuelwood in the region.

2.2.3. The legal context in colonial Uttarakhand

The Indian Forest Act was initially drafted in 1865, primarily to facilitate the declaration of forests
as state property for the implementation of ‘scientific forestry’ operations. The Act notified all lands
covered with trees, brushwood or jungle as Government Forest, but did not immediately curtail
people’s rights. The legislation was modified in 1878, as the establishment found that people’s
rights interfered with clear-felling operations in commercially valuable forests. A Forest Policy in
1894 established strategies for scientific forestry, giving economic interests primacy over all else,
and justified the curtailment of people’s traditional rights in the name of conservation.
To quote Nanda: ‘From 1910-17, the colonial government attempted to tighten its control over
forest resources by notifying over 7,500sq.km of the commons in British territory as Reserve
Forests, severely restricting people’s use rights. Following rebellions and incendriaism (see later in
section 2.3.1), 4,460sq.km of the commercially less valuable new reserves were transferred back
to the civil administration. Thus, by the early 20th century, the uncultivated commons had been
divided into 3 legal categories of forests: commercially valuable class II reserves under the forest
department; and commercially less valuable class I reserves and civil/soyam (in the Tehri State,
non-reserve forest lands under the civil administration were called soyam lands) forests, under the
civil administration.’24 (With regard to rebellions, see section 2.3.1)
The Indian Forests Act, 1927, divided forests mainly into Reserved
Forests (RF) and Protected Forests (PF) in which traditional rights
were severely curtailed and henceforth called concessions. A third
category of Village Forest (VF) was also provided for to meet the
basic needs of village communities.
The Uttar Pradesh Panchayati Forest Rules, 1931, were drafted as
a result of several protests over the curtailment of traditional rights of
access to forests and forest produce. The Rules required establishment
of van panchayats (forest councils) as democratically elected village-level
institutions, to be entrusted with official sanction to manage patches of forest
to be handed over to them. The van panchayats were mainly established
in Class I reserves and civil/soyam forests. These van panchayats were,
however, given extremely limited financial and discretionary powers (these
have been discussed in greater detail in Section 3).
 Uttarakhand 713

2.3. Rights and privileges of local communities

The forests of Uttarakhand were considered to be of little commercial importance to the people
of the region and the tracts adjoining villages and toks (hamlets) were dense enough to meet the
requirements of a thin and disperse populace. The state did not immediately impose too many
restrictions over the rights of the people, as commercial interests were limited. Resource use was
governed by traditional boundaries, where village control over common lands existed, and acted
as a check to over-exploitation.
Ruling dynasties of the Tehri Riyasat allowed trees to be felled for legitimate household needs such
as building timber, but not for commercial profit. Trees were not looked at in terms of commercial
profit, and urban markets basically did not exist to absorb vast amounts of timber. Forest produce
that regenerated every year, on the other hand, was harvested by village communities, and simply
taxed on its way out of Garhwal. Local household consumption was exempt from taxation.
In the British-administered territories, prior to British conquest in 1815, the hill peasantry
effectively exercised direct control over the use and management of cultivated lands and
uncultivated commons, with little interference from earlier rulers. Resident communities regulated
use within customary village boundaries by evolving their own rules rooted in cultural norms and
traditions.25
Considering that the local livelihoods were so directly and deeply interlinked with the surrounding
resources of the hill people and that the area was fairly inaccessible, systems of natural resource
management were deeply entrenched in the local cultures. Local systems of resource management
included forest panchayats (councils), lath panchayats (see later for details), seasonal transhumance
to alpine pastures to avoid over-exploitation of local resources, etc.
In 1823, the colonial regime undertook the first land revenue settlement. This recorded
customary village boundaries, categorizing the land within them as cultivated naap (measured)
and uncultivated benaap (unmeasured) lands. Although villagers continued to enjoy unrestricted
use and the right to clear benaap land for cultivation, the state appropriated local authority for
granting recognition to village boundaries. The saal assi (the revenue settlement year of 1823 is the
80th year according to the Hindu calender) boundaries in the erstwhile Kumaon, and unrecorded
traditional boundaries in Tehri Garhwal, continue to be the basis of community forest management
and inter-village boundary disputes over rights in the commons, including in forest areas reserved
90 years ago.26
In 1893, all unmeasured ‘waste’ lands in Kumaon were declared District Protected Forests under
the control of the district commissioners. This legally classified all village common lands as ‘forests’,
irrespective of whether they had tree cover or not, and converted them into state property. A
resource base managed holistically was artificially and permanently divided into forest and non-
forest lands. The division, and its implied freezing of land use, has not been reviewed since, despite
dramatic changes in socio-economic and political contexts.27
After the assi saal bandobast of 1823, while terraced lands immediately surrounding the lower
hill ranges were reserved for the timber and bamboo requirements of the state, extensive forests
below were still open to the villagers.28 With improved access, the adoption of Wilson’s technique of
log transport and heavy increases in timber demand, however, the British Government drastically
curtailed rights and privileges of local communities, overturning indigenous systems of exploitation
in favour of systems that encouraged dealing with locals through zamindars or contractors.
Indigenous rights were gradually extinguished and outsiders were introduced to deal with harvesting
operations. Some of the more severe restrictions imposed on local people were:29
• No person shall cut or remove any reserved tree (except chir trees 0.9 m or more in girth at
state chapter - uttarakhand

breast height, and not standing within 30 m of any road) without a license;
• No person shall cut or remove any tree other than a reserved tree except for use within 8.3
km of the place in which such a tree or timber is produced for bonafide agricultural or domestic
purposes;
• The cutting or removal of trees and timber, and the collection and manufacturing and removal
of forest produce for purpose of trade is prohibited, except under, and in accordance with, the
condition of a license granted by the deputy commissioner;
• Lopping of trees above 45.72 cm in girth for fodder or manure is permitted;
• No extension of cultivation when it involves the cutting of trees shall be made except with the
permission in writing of the deputy commissioner;
714 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

• Except with the permission in writing of the deputy commissioner, no person shall set snares or
traps;
• No person shall shoot or hunt or enter any forest in time of snow for the purpose of driving or
otherwise destroying game therein except under and in accordance of a license granted by the
deputy commissioner.
Scientific forestry, with its agenda of sustained commercial timber harvesting favouring only
certain coniferous species, gradually learnt to manipulate local use patterns to the ends of the
state. Some major examples of this manipulation are:
• Grazing was only permitted in areas where undergrowth posed a fire hazard;
• Lopping of oaks and other broad-leaved species was allowed in mixed forests which helped
gradually transform them into pure stands of commercially favoured conifers like chir pine, oaks
and other broad-leaved species were deliberately felled and girdled by the department to favour
conifers in some mixed forests;
• Controlled fires with a system of fire lines and counter fires were lit annually by the forest
department before villagers could light their annual fires.30
After the public uprising and based on the grievances committee’s recommendations (see following
section), people’s rights were restored in commercially less valuable Class I Reserves. However,
rights were given to ‘all bonafide residents of Kumaon’, thereby converting common property
resources defined by the saal assi village boundaries into open access areas. Provisions for van
panchayats to exercise community control over legally constituted ‘village forests’ demarcated
from within the Class I reserves and civil forests was made, though applicable only in those villages
which applied for them. This enabled sections of the peasantry to retrieve some space for local
forest management. On the other hand, the van panchayat rules were operationalised only in
1931, ten years after the creation of Class I Reserves. During this time and in areas where there
were no van panchayats, even subsequently uncontrolled extraction from Class I reserves was
done by both the state (through giving contracts for making charcoal from oak) and the peasantry,
due to creation of an open access regime.31

2.3.1. People’s uprisings in the pre-independence era

The gradual destruction of livelihoods through the curtailment of traditional and customary rights,
mass clear-felling, monoculture plantations and manipulated regeneration of only commercially
valuable species led to several popular uprisings against the state, both in the Riyasat of Tehri-
Garhwal and the British-administered Garhwal and Kumaon Divisions.
In Tehri-Garhwal, a major traditional protest or dhandaak was staged in 1906 over the demarcation
and reservation of a sacred grove near the famous Chandrabadini temple in present-day Jakhnidhar
block. The conservator was surrounded by villagers, attacked and branded with a red-hot coin. The
incident has become folklore, and is even today remembered as the ‘Chandrabadini dhandaak’. In
1913, the very first article denouncing the policies of Maharaja Pratap Shah of the Tehri-Garhwal
Riyasat was published in a local newspaper, The Garhwali.
Following the takeover of common lands by the government and restricted access to resources
between 1910 and 1917, Garhwal and Kumaon faced formidable shortages of fodder, fuelwood
and timber in 1921. People in the hills decided to put an end to all kinds of co-operation with the
government in the management of forests, including fighting forest fires or stopping ‘illegal’ cutting
of green trees. Large tracts of Reserved Forest were burnt by local people to register their protest
against the anti-people policy of the government that denied people’s access to these forests.
In order to avert an impending rebellion by the soldiers from Kumaon and Garhwal, the British
government set up a Forest Grievances Committee under the chairmanship of P. Wyandham (the
then commissioner of Kumaon).32 The committee’s terms of reference focused on three major
areas: (i) difficulties experienced by those living in and near forests as a result of existing systems
of state forest management; (ii) eliciting local interest in
conserving and managing forests; and (iii) securing and
encouraging co-operation with the forest department.
The Committee toured Almora from 16-27 May
1921 and British Garhwal from 28 May-19 July 1921,
examining a total of 5,040 witnesses either in person or
through their representatives. The committee felt that
the most important problem faced by villagers was the
 Uttarakhand 715

ban imposed on lopping by the FD, and proposed to remove all restrictions on the
lopping of oak and kokat trees (a term signifying ‘inferior timber’, encompassing
all tree species except the few recognized commercial timber species), except from
areas demarcated for regeneration. It also proposed to remove restrictions on
grazing animals including goats from these areas. To deal with 11 points of
grievances, the committee suggested four sets of remedies. The first listed five
kinds of forests (mainly isolated patches) which were to be excluded from the
management of the state and handed over to villagers. The second involved
the removal of existing boundaries of reserve forests where they were either
too close to settlements or where the population had pressing needs. The third
was to carry out enquiries into land acquisition cases and the last involved the
removal of rules and regulations in reserves maintained by the forest department
where they could be dispensed with. To achieve this, the committee divided these reserve forests
into two classes. Class I were the forests having little or no commercial value, in which the FD’s
management was supposed to be nominal and there was no general restriction on the rights of
people. Under Class II forests, the FD was supposed to continue its control, especially in matters
related to fire control, resin tapping and the preservation from damage of all species having
commercial importance, keeping aside one-sixth of the area for regeneration.33
In the Tehri Riyasat, resentment again simmered and then exploded in the infamous 1930
‘Rawain kaand’ incident. A few villages in the Rawain area of the Jumna valley established an azad
panchayat34 to protest the exploitative forest policies of the maharaja, particularly the ban on
grazing in the local forests. The villagers maintained that they depended on these forests for their
livelihoods, and grazing cattle was their right. They believed that the maharaja’s chief advisor, and
not the maharaja himself, was responsible for the curtailment of their rights. They held regular
meetings on a flat field by the river and planned to march to Tehri to protest to the maharaja.
The chief advisor, Chakradhar Juyal, arrived with a contingent of armed police on horseback and,
seeing a crowd of people assembled, began firing indiscriminately. There was a stampede, and at
least 30 people died; some shot, others drowned trying to flee.
The movement was dissipated, but the widespread condemnation of this brutality grew, and in
1939 the praja mandal was established in Dehradun as a platform for the public to express their
views. At the forefront of this movement was a fiery young leader Sridev Suman, who openly
criticized the policies of both the British and the maharaja. He immediately developed a substantial
following in the villages of Tehri-Garhwal. Suman was arrested, and after a prolonged hunger strike,
died in custody at the Narendranagar jail. His death led to a series of protests that culminated in
the people of Tehri rejecting the maharaja’s leadership and the successive declaration of several
azad panchayats. Growing disenchantment with the maharaja resulted in the Tehri Riyasat being
merged with the United Provinces (later Uttar Pradesh), in 1949. Other important uprisings that
reflected the fight for regaining control over traditional rights are the Tehri Andolan of 1946, the
Saklana Andolan of 1947, and the Kirtinagar Andolan of 1948.35

2.4. The post-colonial independence era

2.4.1. Management of forest resources by the state
By the time the Uttarakhand region became part of independent India, the forest bureaucracy had
become well and truly entrenched, and profit remained the sole motive of management. Contrary
to popular belief, the plunder of the Himalyan forests continued after independence with even
more aggression than before, as urban markets greatly expanded. The Forest Policy Resolution of
1952 was passed to accommodate the demands of industry for raw material, pledging forests to
state chapter - uttarakhand

the ‘national interest’. Intensive road building was taken up after the Chinese invasion of 1962, for
strategic reasons that helped facilitate transport of forest products to urban markets in the plains.
The decade between 1966 and 1977 saw a dramatic increase of paper mills in the region.36 In
addition to the demands of industry,37 expanding urban centres required large quantities of timber
and fuelwood.38 The forest department responded to these increasing demands by reaching its
contractors to the remotest corners of the states through a network of roads.
Though these measures ensured that revenue generated from forests increased manifold, the
production of timber and firewood reached a plateau after 1966-67. S.S. Negi notes an example
of the official view of the forest department: ‘The process of environmental degradation assumed
significant proportions in this mountainous region after independence. This period saw a rapid
increase in the cattle and human population; accelerated pace of road and canal construction and
an unprecedented biotic pressure on the forest ecosystem.’39
716 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

The fallacious nature of this view is illustrated by M.D. Chaturvedi, Chief Conservator of
Forests, Uttar Pradesh, by relating the number of cattle to the region’s population, total area
under cultivation, and the requirements of milk and draught power. He states: ‘From these figures
emerges the startling fact that far from being in excess, the bovine stock is hardly sufficient to
cope with the agricultural requirements of these provinces…there is one work animal for every 6.2
acres of cultivation in the Himalayan tract, 3.25 acres in the Gangetic basin, and 4.8 acres in the
Central Indian Plateau. The position of milch and breeding animals is even worse. There is only 1
cow or buffalo for 9 persons in the Himalayan tract, 6 persons in the Gangetic basin and for 3 in
the Central Indian Plateau.’40
Increasing human populations being responsible for degradation is a hypothesis also not supported
by facts. Decadal increases in population between 1940 and 1981 were well below the national
average, and the increase between 1971 and 1981 was probably due to the increased activities
related to the construction of the Tehri dam.

2.4.2. Rights, privileges and post-independent uprisings

The British discrimination towards local people and the curtailment of their traditional rights
continued in post-Independence Uttarakhand. In 1980, rightholders’ share of the overall timber
output declined from the already miniscule 6.4 per cent to 5.6 per cent, while the purchasers’
share increased from 88 per cent to an overwhelming 93 per cent. As a result of several State
Forest Policies, the area under oak and other deciduous forests on which local people depended for
their livelihoods had reduced by 23 per cent between 1939 and 1982 in the Tehri division alone.
Tehri has been losing about 600 ha of oak forest every year for the last 40 years.41
Thus local livelihoods received even less attention than under colonial rule, as the state policy
consistently favoured export of raw timber and resin for processing by large industry in the plains.
By the 1970s, the Chipko movement had emerged to demand that priority be given to local
employment in the extraction and processing of forest produce. Increasing incidents of landslides
and floods and declining availability of biomass for subsistence needs propelled hill women into the
movement, broadening the popular base of Chipko protests and giving them their ‘eco-feminist’
label.
Ironically, the Van Panchayat Rules were revised in 1976 at the height of the Chipko movement,
substantially reducing the authority and entitlements of the van panchayats.42 The issue of
local forest rights, however, was soon subsumed within the new national and global ideology of
environmental conservation. Instead of priority to local forest-based livelihoods and employment,
Chipko was used to justify a spate of centralizing environmental policies and laws. The Forest
Conservation Act of 1980 empowered the central government to make decisions related to the
alienation of even the smallest patch of forest land. The Uttar Pradesh Resin and Forest Produce
Act, 1976, made tapping, sale and purchase of all resin a state monopoly.43 The forest department
and allied departments used the Uttar Pradesh and Hill Areas Tree Conservation Act, 1976, to
create a nightmare for innocent villagers. Under this Act, villagers are forced to obtain permission
from the District Collector/DFO to harvest trees standing on their own lands.
In 1981 (after a fast by Sunderlal Bahuguna against indiscriminate felling), a 15-year ban was
imposed on all commercial felling in the Uttar Pradesh Himalayas above 1000 metres. In 1986,
the ban was made applicable above an altitude of 2500 meters. At lower altitudes, green felling
of pine as per the FD Working Plans is permitted. Today the only permitted fellings are for the
villagers’ timber rights (haq haquque). The quantities for these have not been revised since the
forest settlements of 1910-17, and are completely inadequate. Major conflicts between people and
protected area managers have erupted due to large-scale resource displacement caused by their
non-participatory demarcation, affecting the livelihoods of an estimated half a million people.44
On the other hand, despite the ban, it is mystifying to note that ‘...the availability of timber (after
1981), now exclusively obtained from fallen and windblown trees, remains almost the same as it
was when the forests were commercially exploited!’45 Some important clues as to how this could
be come from these facts:
• 7930 ha of forest were affected by fire between 1981 and 1987 as compared to only 1605
between 1973 and 1980.
• There was no increase in funds for fire-fighting measures, resulting in non-existent maintenance
of fire lines after the green felling ban in 1981.
• Green trees are reported to be felled and sawn along with fallen trees in every forest
division.46
 Uttarakhand 717

• A massive increase in outlay of funds for plantation on civil/soyam forest lands with dry, eroded
soils and almost no tree cover.47
As the largest custodian of state property,48 the forest department has been unable to maintain
the forests in good condition or meet people’s forest-based livelihood needs. Its responsibility
for enforcing the Forest Conservation and Wild Life (Protection) Acts has reinforced its image
as an anti-people agency. Thus, in 1988-89 some of the Chipko activists started yet another,
relatively less known, Ped Kato Andolan (‘cut trees movement’). They argued that the Forest
Conservation Act ‘was being used to hold up basic development schemes for the hill villages while
the builders’ mafia continues to flout it brazenly under the guise of promoting tourism.’49 More
recently, resource displacement and loss of livelihoods caused by expansion of the protected
area network has produced the Jhapto Cheeno Andolan (snatch-and-grab movement) reflecting
the intense feelings of alienation and disempowerment. Women who earned international fame
for stopping contractors from felling their forests during Chipko have come to hate the word
paryavaran (environment). As one of these women from Reni village complained ‘...they have put
this entire (surrounding forest) area under the Nanda Devi National Park. I can’t even pick herbs
to treat a stomach ache any more.’50 (See Box 1).
Centralized forest management based on a conservationist ideology was among a significant
propellant for the movement for a separate state. A separate state, however, has not brought
much joy to people in terms of control over local resources or preference being given to the
local livelihoods. Soon after the new state was formed in 1999, the Van Panchayat Rules were
amended in 2000 to bring van panchayat forests under greater FD control. Frustration among the
local people is indicated by the statement of a van panchayat sarpanch during a van panchayat
adhiveshan (gathering) being organised by the local groups at Bhowali in 2002 to oppose the
amendments. ‘We fought against the colonial rule, we thought they were colonials and did not
understand us, our culture, our needs. As a result of this agitation we regained some of the lost
powers and control. After Independence, we thought we had our own government but they went a
few steps beyond the British to take our powers away. We thought these are plains people—they
don’t understand our circumstances. We fought for a separate state, many of our brothers and
sisters lost their lives. After we got the status of a separate state we celebrated thinking we are
now in control. But a separate state has meant even more restrictions and alienation for us.’ Thus
now there is a movement in the state to retain the powers of van panchayats forests rather than
these being appropriated by the FD under Village Forest Joint Management Programme (VFJM).51
In Uttarakhand, JFM activities actively target already existing village level institutions, the van
panchayats that have far more control under existing rules over the forests they manage as
compared to the rights conferred by the JFM resolution. The argument trotted out is that van
panchayats do not function properly, and are defunct institutions that should therefore be replaced.
This is patently insincere. No attempts have been made to understand why van panchayats are
not functioning effectively, or to address the problems in the Van Panchayat Rules that have led
to this situation. JFM in the State is currently commercialising and politicising these institutions
while at the same time disrupting traditional methods of managing forests jointly between several
villages.

Box 1
Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve and National Park and Local People52
The Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve and National Park came into existence in 1982 following
the recommendations of a few conservationists and foresters. Villages included within the
state chapter - uttarakhand

boundaries of the Biosphere Reserve are Reni, Lata, Peng, Tolma, Fagti, Markada, Kaga, Garpak,
Dunagiri and Malari. There are no villages located within the National Park, but traditional
resource use areas do fall inside the boundaries. The local community were traditionally traders
with Tibet, manufacturing medicine and trading in medicinal plants collected from high alpine
pastures and the high forest reaches. Some were migratory pastoralists, who made use of the
alpine pastures in summers and the bhabbar grass areas in the foothills in winters. Some found
additional employment acting as guides and porters to mountaineering and trekking groups to
Nanda Devi and other peaks in the area.
Trade with Tibet has been closed since the 1962 Chinese incursions and traditional grazing
routes in the foothills have either been developed or declared protected areas. Their last source
of income disappeared with the decision to seal all entry points to the National Park, which
destroyed the tourist trade and restricted people’s access to the alpine pastures of the Inner
Sanctuary.
718 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Faced with few livelihood options in their harsh environment, villagers launched the Jhapto
Cheeno Andolan (Snatch-and-Grab Movement). After 20 years of agitation, the National Park
has been reopened to tourism and a decision has been made to share a percentage of the
benefits with local people. Dhan Singh Negi of Lata village (Joshimath district, just outside the
biosphere reserve), however, states that people have been given either doles or jobs that they
are not very interested in. ‘No one considers the fact that we are traditional traders and that is
where our skills lie.’ Though the current plan envisages a share of the profit to be directed to
local communities, villagers are not involved with tourism planning and implementation. They
will merely be the porters and beneficiaries of the profit. Greater involvement of the people in
management and planning can ensure long-term ecological security of a sensitive area that
would face problems of over-exploitation of resources, hunting, garbage and other problems
related to tourism.

3. Community conservation initiatives

In this section four types of initiatives in Uttarakhand are discussed: (i) people’s struggles for
natural resource conservation; (ii) people’s struggles for NR conservation community resource
management institutions; (iii) traditional conservation management systems; and (iv) sacred
elements in community conservation. It is estimated that 50 per cent of villages in Garhwal have
some form of conservation system, 20 per cent have relatively inactive systems and 30 per cent
follow open access regime.53

3.1. People’s struggles for natural resource conservation and local

livelihoods
Struggles and movements for natural resource conservation and local livelihood needs have been
a part of hill people’s lives for decades now. Some movements like Chipko and Cheeno Jhapto have
been mentioned earlier.
In the late 1980s, areas in and around Nahikalan in Dehradun District were leased out for
limestone mining by the government. Initially local people participated in the mining operations
as wage labourers. Subsequently, the impacts of mining started directly affecting the people with
increased incidents of landslides, soil loss, destruction of water sources and forest degradation. The
villagers requested a Delhi-based NGO, Kalpavriksh, to conduct an investigation on the impacts
of mining. Based on the findings of the investigation, a case was filed jointly by the villagers of
Nahikalan and Kalpavriksh. This case was clubbed with another case by an NGO against mining
in the surrounds of Dehradun. Mining in and around Dehradun, including at Nahikalan, was finally
stopped after a court order in the late 1980s.54
Another noteworthy movement is the one started in Hemwalghati in Tehri Garhwal. Some Chipko
activists from this region, belonging to villages like Jardhargaon (see case studies for details) in
Tehri district, realised that their own villages were headed towards an unsustainable existence.
Jobs were few and far between and youth were migrating out; forests stood degraded, incapable
of sustaining local needs; and local seeds had been replaced by hybrid varieties often not able
to tolerate harsh local conditions and diseases. Some of these people initiated forest protection
activities in their respective villages: in Jardhargaon, for instance, several hundred hectares of
forest were regenerated and are now under protection. They also started the Beej Bachao Andolan
(Save the Seeds Movement). A group of villagers travelled from village to village to collect seeds
of the indigenous crop varieties. These crops, including a few hundred varieties of rice and beans
are now, among others, being grown by many villagers. Villagers also follow traditional systems of
cropping like baranaja (growing twelve or more crops together in a single field to optimise growing
conditions, sustain soil fertility and meet diverse needs). Thus this Andolan has done remarkable
pioneering work related to in situ conservation of threatened indigenous Himalayan crop varieties
through cultivation, awareness, and sharing of seeds and ideas.55

3.2. Community resource management institutions

3.2.1. Lath panchayats
This traditional institution is little known outside the region and has not been studied much. In
fact, unlike van panchayats, this system is pre-British in origin and is rooted in the village system
of Uttarakhand. The system is based on the oral tradition of governance of surrounding forests
 Uttarakhand 719

carried from generation to generation. How the name lath (stick) came to be associated with this
institution makes for an interesting anecdote. The hill panches (village elders responsible for major
village decisions) were famous for their community feeling and judicial acumen. Seeing this, a
sage living in a village shrine showered his blessings on them and gave them a lathi (stick) with
a condition that the stick should be used for the benefit of all the families in the village without
actually dividing the stick. The stick was not to be used for private benefit, else its power would
vanish and village society would disintegrate. The village elders fixed the boundary of the forest
adjacent to the village and made each family responsible for the protection of the forests. As a
symbol of the power and authority, the holy stick would rotate from one family to another for the
whole year. The family at whose door the stick was kept on a particular day was responsible for
protection of the forest on that day. With time this system came to be known as the lath panchayat.
There are several other stories about the origin of lath panchayats.
Lath panchayats exist almost everywhere in Uttarakhand. However, it is estimated that they may
be more numerous in Almora, Tehri and Chamoli Districts. Since many lath panchayats have been
converted into van panchayats and no records have been maintained about the lath panchayats,
it is difficult to estimate their exact number. One such lath panchayat exists in Bageshwar district
where a large number of banj trees are still present and are well conserved by the people.56
Structure
A lath panchayat is composed of a general body and an executive body. In the general body, all
the households of a revenue village are represented through their heads. This means that almost
always only men are the members of this body, while women are excluded. In the executive, 3-
7 selected elders run the day-to-day affairs of the panchayat. They resolve the disputes among
the members and evolve a formula to share the forest produce. The executive implements the
decisions taken by the general body and discusses new rules. There is no formal sarpanch or
pradhan in lath panchayats.
Rules and regulations followed
All rules on control and utilisation of forest produce are formulated on the basis of unanimity, when
all families agree to them. These rules vary from village to village. These rules have evolved on the
basis of the availability of forest produce, the condition of trees and species, people’s awareness,
carrying capacity of the forest, requirement of people and potent dangers. Lath panchayat rules
are unwritten and are subject to changes. However, in some villages, a record of some sort has
been maintained, like through opening of an account in a bank. Most villages have a rule to protect
patches of forests on a rotational basis, often following a five-yearly rotation period.
Another common rule is that of not cutting large branches and green timber. During the closed
period, no extraction is allowed from that part of the forest. In some forests, plantation works
have been undertaken. In some villages grazing is totally prohibited, while in others hunting is
prohibited.
Control and protection
In all lath panchayat villages, rules exist to control outsiders and livestock from entering the
protected patches and also to control undesirable behaviour of their own people. Some villages
appoint chowkidars (forest guards), with each family contributing towards his/her salary in cash
and/or kind. In some villages, villagers carry out voluntary patrolling on a rotational basis. In other
instances villagers have made a collective commitment towards protection of forests. In case of a
forest fire, the entire village community helps by digging trenches, making fire lines and beating
the fire with bushes.
Systems of punishment
state chapter - uttarakhand

Depending on the nature of offence committed, there are different punitive measures in lath
panchayats. These punishments often discriminate between local villagers and outsiders. Usually
outsiders are charged higher fines for the same offence than are local villagers. The most common
types of punishment include fines and confiscation of livestock, weapons,
etc.
Conflict resolution
At the village level, the panches of the lath panchayats preside over
disputes between the parties. If the dispute is between two villages, the
panches and pradhans of both the villages sit together to hear the case.
Only in a few instances, where decisions have not been acceptable to all
concerned, have the cases been taken to court.
720 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Distribution of produce and income

Usually an equitable distribution of forest produce amongst all members is followed. In case of
surplus the members are allowed to barter or sell their share to other members. The amount to be
distributed is decided based upon the need of the people and the availability of the forest produce.
In case of excess availability of grass and fodder, it is shared with neighbouring villages, usually in
exchange for food grains. All income to the lath panchayat—usually by fines or selling produce—is
deposited in the village post office. The legal status of lath panchayat forests is not very clear, as
these forests have not been categorised under any existing class. The ownership in these forests
rests with the community; individuals cannot sell forest produce. Only the MC of lath panchayats
can sell, that too only when forest products are in surfeit and people of the neighbouring villages
have a pressing need for them. This fund is used for community expenditure, such as purchase of
utensils, loans to the members, salary of chowkidars, or plantations. It has been observed that the
utilisation of produce from the forest under this traditional management system remains by and
large sustainable. Broad-leaf species are most prominent in these forests. They yield fodder leaves
that are an important biomass for the hill people. However, the harvesting of fodder leaves is done
under controlled conditions once a year, and often areas are harvested on rotation. For agricultural
implements and housing purposes, two or three trees are cut every year.

3.2.2. Van panchayats

Van panchayats are officially recognised village institutions legally constituted under the Uttar
Pradesh Panchayati Forest Rules of 1931 of the District Schedule Act. After independence in 1964,
the Class I forests were included within the Reserved Forests. In 1976, a revised set of Van
Panchayat Rules was implemented and van panchayats were brought under section 28 of Indian
Forest Act. Thus van panchayats got the status of Village Forests, and the FD now had a greater
role to play in the management of these forests. Also Reserved Forests were debarred from being
brought under van panchayats. The van panchayat provision was not extended to the erstwhile
princely state of Tehri till 1991. After the formation of the separate state of Uttarakhand, VP
rules were revised once again in 2001. These rules strengthened the presence of the FD in van
panchayat matters.
As per the1931 rules, any 2 or more right holding residents of a village could apply to the Deputy
Commissioner (DC) to demarcate a specified forest area within the village’s saal assi boundary
as a village forest provided that one-third or more of the rightholders in that area did not object.
After dealing with any claims or objections, the DC called a meeting of the residents and other
rightholders for electing 3 to 9 panches for managing the village forest. The panches selected a
sarpanch from among themselves.
The elected representatives signed an agreement that the village forest land would not be sold or
partitioned57 and that ‘the produce of the panchayat forest shall be utilized by the panchayat to the
best advantage of the village community and of the right-holders.’ The panchayat had the status of
a forest officer with the powers to fine or prosecute offenders and ‘to sell forest produce,58 including
slates and stones without detriment to the forest, and to issue permits and charge fees for grazing
or cutting grass or collecting fuel.’ Resin from chir pine trees was the only product that could not
be extracted or sold without the permission of the forest department and resin income had to be
shared with the department where extraction was done by the latter. The van panchayat had full
control over use and income from forest resources and all dues payable to it were deemed as dues
payable to the government, recoverable as arrears of land revenue. The only role assigned to
forest officers was to inspect the panchayat forests or their records, and report on their functioning
or the condition of their forests, if requested to do so by the Deputy Commissioner.
According to recent estimates, there are 6,069 van panchayats managing 405,426 hectares59of
forests (13.63 per cent of total forest area) in the UP hills. These forests are demarcated as
village forests under section 28 of the Indian Forest Act and are entered in the land records in
the panchayat’s name.60 Most of these have been carved out of civil (protected) forests under the
jurisdiction of the revenue department prior to 1976, also out of Class I Reserve Forests now under
the forest department’s control.61 The area under each van panchayat ranges from a fraction of a
hectare up to over 2,000 hectares.62
Functions of the van panchayats
• To check indiscriminate felling of trees and tampering of fencing by villagers;
• To ensure the equitable distribution of forest products amongst the members;
• To earmark silviculturally fit trees for felling;
 Uttarakhand 721

• To prevent encroachment on van panchayat lands;

• To fix boundary pillars and to maintain them; and
• To carry out the directives of the Deputy Commissioner or Sub-Divisional Magistrate regarding
the administration of these forests.
In the discharge of its functions a van panchayat can levy fines upto Rs 500 with the prior
approval of the Deputy Commissioner. A van panchayat can also seize cattle and the offending
cattle can be impounded. In this respect van panchayats enjoy all the powers under the Cattle
Trespass Act, 1871. Van panchayats can also confiscate weapons of offenders.
Financial powers of van panchayats
• Van panchayats can sell the grass, fallen twigs for firewood, and stones and slates to local
people;
• Resin tapping and felling of trees can be taken up with the approval of the forest department;
• Auction of trees up to the estimated value of Rs 5000 can be undertaken with the approval of the
Divisional Forest Officer;
• Auctions above Rs 5000 are conducted by the forest department with the approval of the
Conservator of Forests
• The forest department charges all expenditure incurred in resin tapping from van panchayat
forests. On revenues other than resin, the forest department charges 10 per cent as administrative
expenditures. 20 per cent of revenue generated goes to the zilla parishad for creating and
maintaining infrastructure, 40 per cent to the gram sabha for local development schemes
sanctioned by the Deputy Commissioner of the district, and 40 per cent to the forest department,
meant for maintenance and development of panchayat forests.
• In fact ‘only 40 per cent of the proceeds from sales go into panchayat accounts and even these
can be spent only with government’s (i.e., the deputy commissioner’s) permission.’63 Income
realized from sale of forest produce is thus not readily available to the van panchayats for
developing roads, schools and hospitals in the village.
Constraints faced by van panchayats
Less than one-third of the villages in Uttarakhand have opted for van panchayats. Formation of
van panchayats has not been an easy process for villagers as it involved getting official sanction from
the Divisional Commissioner, which was never easy for villages in faraway places. ‘Since its very
inception, van panchayats have been facing a lot of problems and no serious attempts have been
made to address them,’ says R.S. Tolia, Director, Centre for Development Studies, an institution
established by the Uttar Pradesh Administrative Academy. They face many administrative, financial
and management problems.
Van panchayats in general do not have women members. The representation of other weaker
sections is also low. This has led to great amount of dissatisfaction among these sections.
Considering that women are more dependent on forests, management rarely takes into account
their perspective and needs. After the 1976 amendment the FD has been responsible for drafting
and implementation of working plans in the VP forests; however, no examples are known of VP
forests where working plans have been made. Encroachment on the van panchayats and pilferage of
grass, fodder leaves, fuel, timber, etc., is common. The sarpanch imposes fines on the recalcitrant
persons. These fines are supposed to be realised by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate but the system
seldom works.
state chapter - uttarakhand

The sarpanch and members of the van panchayat do not get any travelling or daily allowance
for watch and ward and other work of the van panchayat. Therefore, by and large they either do
not take much interest in panchayat forest work or try to take one advantage or other from them.
Increasingly, the government is promoting hasty establishment of van panchayats. In Nainital
district alone, about 450 new van panchayats have come up in the last two years. During 1997-
98 itself, 229 new van panchayats were established all over Uttarakhand, most of them not more
than a few acres large and hence completely incapable of supporting any local needs. This artificial
and state-sponsored movement will lead towards degeneration of VPs, a fear being expressed by
scholars and activists. It is also felt that this will further weaken the sense of community that has
been already eroded by the UP Forest Conservation Act of 1980, ‘and will introduce more cavalier
attitude towards the forest which now came to be seen as government property.’64
722 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Quality of forests in VPs

In 1960, the Kumaun Forests Fact Finding
Committee found the condition of panchayat forests
to be ‘generally satisfactory’.65 A study of 11 VPs
in five of the eight hill districts in 1983-84 by the
evaluation unit of the state planning division found
that all of them had prevented illegal felling and
damage due to fire; ten had prevented undue damage
to the trees; nine had prevented encroachments
and eight had exploited forest produce scientifically.
It also found that since the formation of the VPs,
forest wealth had increased by 40-50 percent.66
From a random sample survey of 21 VPs in Nainital,
Almora and Pithoragarh districts, Somanathan
(1991) concluded that van panchayats have, by and
large, maintained oak forests very well, especially
in contrast to the dismal condition of the reserves
(except the ones distant from the habitations). The
situation with respect to chir forests was not found
to be so clear. They seemed to have done as badly
under VP control as in the reserves.67
Erosion of van panchayat authority
Even as the number of van panchayats increased
after independence, from the late 1950s a number
of policy and administrative changes started
undermining their authority. In 1956 the revenue
department abolished the post of the Divisional Van
The state also has a very high agricultural Panchayat Officer, centralising his responsibilities in
diversity, as an already overburdened Deputy Commissioner. This
displayed by Beej Bachao Andolan, Tehri slowed panchayat related paper work and diluted
Photo: Ashish Kothari other forms of support substantially.68
The revision of the 1931 Rules in 1976 drastically curtailed panchayat autonomy, authority and
entitlements. The new rules restricted the area eligible for new VP formation to that falling within
the new village boundaries drawn under the revenue settlement of the early 1960s instead of
the saal assi boundaries. As these excluded Class I Reserve Forests from village boundaries, this
amounted to a steep reduction in the forest area available for van panchayat control.69 While the
villagers continued to depend on these areas, they were no longer permitted to manage them. This
is a major reason for the degraded state of reserve forests near villages.
The revised rules also allocated 20 per cent of the van panchayats’ income to the zilla parishad
(district-level self-government) for development works and 40 per cent to the forest department
for reinvesting in panchayat forests. The remaining 40 per cent share left for the panchayats
could no longer be used without prior permission from the Sub-Divisional Magistrate or Deputy
Commissioner. The sarpanch now required approval even to employ and pay watchers for forest
protection. This effectively deprived the van panchayats in remote villages from access to their own
drastically reduced share of income, as the costs of repeated trips to distant offices outweighed
the benefits.70 The revised rules made the forest department responsible for preparing working
plans for all panchayat forests, thereby expanding its technical authority substantially. However,
neither has this money been ploughed back nor any working plans formulated. Harvested or fallen
timber which could only be auctioned by forest officers, often rotted in panchayat forests due to no
officers coming to conduct sales.
The revenue department similarly developed no effective mechanisms for administering
the expanded authority it centralized in itself for supervising the van panchayats’ day-to-day
functioning. Under overall supervision of the Deputy Commissioner in each district, assisted by the
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Forest Panchayat Inspectors are responsible for administrative support
to VPs. However only 14 inspectors were expected to support 4891 VPs spread over 29 tehsils71
with a monthly travel allowance of only Rs 80 (less than $2), which had not been revised for
decades.72 Till the late 1950s the panchayat inspectors played a mediating and facilitative role.
From the 1960s onwards, only the better-endowed VPs could bribe them to visit for essential
procedural requirements.
The deputy commissioners and sub-divisional magistrates themselves abused their authority,
 Uttarakhand 723

resorting to a host of ad hoc interventions in VP affairs. In many of our case sites, van panchayat
councils had been suspended arbitrarily with no fresh elections held for years at a time. VP
members were never clear about the money credited to them. Requests for assistance in dealing
with encroachments on van panchayat forests were met with a stony silence, with some patwaris
actually abetting the encroachments. While denying the panchayats access to their own funds even
for essential forest protection needs, the Deputy Commissioners falsely claimed high achievement
of district small-savings targets by depositing them in post office accounts. The administration
also encouraged some panchayats to lease their forest land to government cattle breeding farms,
which subsequently encroached on huge additional areas creating scarcity of fodder and pasture
for the villagers’ cattle. A number of van panchayats have ongoing court cases against government
agencies for encroaching on village forest lands.73
The revised rules also concentrated most responsibilities for the van panchayat’s functioning in
the sarpanch74, weakening the strong tradition of collective decision making by van panchayats
while reducing transparency and accountability.
After the ban on commercial fellings in 1980, many VPs were deprived of an important source
of occasional income from timber/charcoal, often used for village development activities.
Simultaneously, the Forest Development Corporation was given monopoly rights over salvage
timber even from van panchayat forests (which earlier could be used by the villagers for their own
needs). Permits for bamboo and cane harvesting stopped being given to artisanal producers in the
mid-1980s. The Tree Preservation Order of 1976 deprived villagers of the right to cut trees even on
their private lands without cumbersome forest department permissions. The latest threat has come
in the form of externally determined expansion of the protected area network. Many panchayats
have come within protected areas, with villagers often losing all or most of their rights in both
village and other surrounding forests. Thousands dependent on resin tapping and collecting lichen
and medicinal herbs from protected areas have been deprived of employment and incomes.
A large number of van panchayats are embroiled in boundary disputes as forests have been
allocated and reallocated among various villages. Reallocations have also created dramatic
inequalities among villages in the kinds of forest resources they can access. Some villages have
no forest land of their own, compelling them to encroach on their neighbours’ resources or on
surrounding Reserve Forests.

3.3. Traditional community resource management systems

Strong local village-level land management and harvesting systems based on geographical and
social realities of the region evolved over thousands of years. These systems appear to have worked
well and remained in place relatively undisturbed until the colonial era of ‘scientific’ forestry. Figures
in Atkinson’s Himalayan Gazeteer, published in 1882, point strongly in this direction.75 For example,
roughly 5 tons of kutki/karvi, a commercially valuable medicinal plant from the bugyaals (alpine
pastures), was being collected every year from the region and traded with the plains since ancient
times. This large amount was being sustainably harvested year after year. Kutki/karvi is presently
on the endangered list. Also 25 tons of jhula, lichens that constitute 80 per cent of the NTFP traded
presently, was being harvested annually. It is now reported to be getting scarce in many areas.76
Each of these management systems was built from the combined knowledge base of several
generations of communities that closely interacted with their environments. We briefly discuss
below community conservation systems in Uttarakhand in relation to (i) forest habitats, (ii)
bugyaals and other grasslands, and (iii) agricultural techniques.
state chapter - uttarakhand

3.3.1. Forest management

The following are some of the common practices followed for conservation of forest patches.
The basic principle that has been followed since time immemorial is rotation and rest. Village
livestock is never kept in one place too long. Transhumance is an absolute must. This is what
allowed the forests near villages to regenerate naturally year after year and provide a seemingly
inexhaustible supply of forest produce, household needs and fulfilling livelihoods. Villages in the
major river valleys seasonally take their livestock up to alpine grasslands (bugyaals); those that
are self-sufficient in forest take their livestock to nearby pastures (kharak/marora); and before the
destruction of the bhabbar sal forests, at least 40 per cent of the population of the region (those
living in the outer ranges) used to migrate every winter down to the bhabbar with their livestock.
Where transhumance has ceased, the greatest destruction is evident. Some common practices
followed are:
• The bari/palta system where every family participates in forest protection taking turns.
724 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

• The chaukidari system where the village selects and hires an individual to patrol the forest and
catch offenders. Payment is made either through the traditional nali system in kind—mainly food
grains, and now the tankha or cash wage system.
• Rotational lopping of patches of forest with rules for fair distribution and use of speed breakers
to over-lopping, e.g., opening certain patches every third day, lateral lopping, only tertiary and
sometimes secondary branches
• The entire village forest is divided into patches for each family to use and manage.
• Exclusive women’s management systems through village groups, e.g., mahila mangal dal, mahila
van panchayat, and in some cases even through Village Joint Forest Management Committees.

3.3.2. Bugyaals and grass patches

Alpine grasslands are characterised by bugi or phichi grass, and are hence known as bugyaals.
The basic principle behind traditional conservation is just like for forests: never stay in one place
too long, keep moving. This practice alone gives a chance to each patch to regenerate adequately
for the next season. The timing of each move to a new patch, arrival in the alpine zone, leaving
the bugyaals at the end of the season—all these have been carefully worked out from long years of
experience to maximize the grazing season and take advantage of favourable climatic conditions
during the summer and monsoon months. Often, when a particular village has managed to maintain
its rights over a patch of bugyaal, grazing taxes are levied to help pay for patrolling and stone-
walling. In the Pranmati Gaad catchment near Tharali, district Chamoli, elders decide areas to be
harvested. The mamala grass harvesting each year is a special event. Puja (prayer) is performed
before the harvest, and special new clothes are stitched for both men and women. In other bugyaals,
there are strict rules for harvesting of medicinal and aromatic plants. The significant point is the
existence even today of regulation, restraint and prevention of unsustainable harvesting by social
sanction, religious festivals, and superstition,77 although these plants have been commercially
traded with the outside world for centuries. For example, brahmkamal, a peculiar flower sacred to
the goddess Nanda Devi and Shiva is harvested only with the teeth. Hands and tools are strictly
not allowed, and considered a defilement of the sacred flower and the deity. Some mechanisms of
grazing land protection in grasslands:
• Ghaas ki maang are family-wise plots demarcated by consensus.
• In grass-surplus areas, sub-plots are auctioned off to the highest bidder, who then has a chance
to sub-contract smaller patches for harvesting.
• Where there is scarce grazing area, the grass patches are protected and allowed to sprout and
be harvested before being opened to grazing.
• Fodder trees on private land are also auctioned off for lopping in scarcity areas, particularly
during the dry season when no fresh grass is available.

3.4. Sacred elements in community conservation

The spiritual aspect of community conservation is often ignored. The greatest motivation other
than the desire to protect one’s livelihood or survival is to be conferred with the blessings of the
local deities, and feel that one is connected with society, the earth and walking the right path as
laid down by tradition. In the Uttarakhand region, this tradition directly means the supervision of
the isht devta, who is specific to each family or clan, and is like ‘a reporting officer’ for the family.
The isht devta must be kept appeased; otherwise he/she may turn against the family. In this
context, conserving certain areas—sometimes restricted to one tree and a small shrine at the edge
of a terraced field—becomes of vital importance in maintaining harmony between the members of
the human family and the larger, extended membership of supernatural entities. Often, when rules
and consensus have failed to regulate often-divisive village society, spiritual concerns have united
the factions, and compelled them to agree on a joint course of action.

3.4.1. Tree worship

Tree worship has been an integral part of ancient Indian culture. It embodies reverence towards
nature, and the spirit of conservation as practised in ancient times. Garhwali culture reflects
reverence for trees even today through sacred groves on hilltops in practically every patti (cluster
of villages), and small shrines dedicated to local deities scattered over villages, agricultural lands,
forest paths and grazing lands. According to a prominent local historian, the Greek legend of
 Uttarakhand 725

the oak tree being sacred to Zeus has been incorporated into local culture through contact and
interaction during the reign of Indo– Greek/Bactrian rulers in Persia more than 2000 years ago,
and the name Banj for the famous oak of the Western Himalayas is derived from the word Vajra
(thunderbolt), associated with Zeus, Lord of the Skies. The sylvan deity and nocturnal herdsman
Airi in whose name sacred groves exist even today is perhaps derived from the Greek deity Ares,
god of war, son of Zeus.78
Ancient Hindu scriptures also refer to tree worship. The Skanda Purana relates: ‘Where the Kosi
River breaks through the mountain barrier and flows down into the plains of upper India, and is
joined by the Sita river, there has been from ancient times a beautiful grove of Asoka trees, where
Ram and his faithful Sita are said to have sojourned. Sita was charmed with the beautiful forest,
and said to Ram, “It is the month of Baisakh. Let us stay in this wood and bathe in the waters
of this river.” So they abode there, and on their return to Ayodhya, the name of the place was
changed to Sitabani, the grove of Sita.’79
Several other species including the deodar are also revered. Leaves of the yew tree are offered
at shrines to the local deities Jangli Devta and Kshetrapal, and leaves and flowers of several other
species including Paiyya, Buraans and Bael are offered at temples and shrines dedicated to the
goddess Nanda Devi.

3.4.2. Sacred groves

The sacred grove is the oldest traditional form of community conservation. It applies to forests,
grasslands, wetlands, and sometimes riverbanks and beaches. In the mountains, nature has
traditionally been the source of religion. Many peaks such as Nanda Devi have been considered
sacred and worshipped. Areas surrounding these peaks have also been considered sacred. For
example, Devi Ka Angan, an intermediary area lying around Nandakhot—a sacred peak—is also
considered sacred. So, the protection of sacred forests around temples and sacred sites elsewhere
has strong historical/mythological roots in the hills.
These dev-van or sacred groves once dotted the forest landscape of Uttarakhand; they especially
proliferated in remote areas. This was because the forests were considered as the dwellings of
gods and deities. The tradition of planting and protecting trees around temples and waterbodies is
very old. In almost all the major temples of the region, trees that are hundreds of years old can
been seen even today. Jageshwar, a famous pilgrimage spot housing one of the 12 Jyotirlingas,
has a thick deodar grove surrounding it. The temple complex belongs to the Katyuri dynasty (c.
1000 AD). The age of a huge deodar tree behind the temple was estimated by the scientists of
Birbal Sahani Institute of Paleobotany, Lucknow, as older than the temple itself! People believed
that numerous local deities protect forests, cattle and fields. In some areas forest areas have
been offered to these local deities. In many places of Almora and Pithoragarh, this tradition is
alive even today. Several large tracts are still protected, albeit to a lesser extent, in the name of
gods and goddesses. From these forest areas, people can take dry twigs and leaves but cannot
cut green leaves and trees. The hunting of wild animals is a strictly forbidden. There are hardly
any formal or written rules for the management of these forest areas. But as people are afraid
of divine repercussion, no one violates this unwritten code of conduct, even surreptitiously. It is
believed that if anyone harmed the dev-ban, the entire community will have to face the wrath of
the deity.
The most famous sacred grove in Garhwal is Hariyali ki Danda, above Gauchar in the Alakananda
valley of Chamoli District. This area, comprising a steep cliff overlooking Gauchar to the north, and
gentler slopes adjoining the Dudhatoli bugyaal to the south, has a temple dedicated
to Hariyali Devi on the hilltop and reportedly stretches over 100 ha. No harvesting
state chapter - uttarakhand

of any produce is permitted, and every year in September a special pooja and
mela are held at the mandir. Local villages participate actively. Jasholi village
is the centre of reverence for Hariyali Devi. Entry to the Hariyali Devi temple
is closed to women.
Another well-known grove is Shewri above Naugaon in the Jumna
valley. This area in Uttarkashi district is called rawain. A danda ki jatir is
held every year where all local villages participate in a procession up
to the hilltop, where pooja is performed, and a mela is held.
Hariyali, Bhumiyal Devta, Jangli Devta and Airadeo are all sylvan
deities that have both protector and supervisor aspects. They are
benevolent to those who respect the forest and use it wisely. But
those who misuse the forest are first liable to be warned by a
726 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

frightening occurrence. If the warning is not heeded, then calamity can befall the offenders and
their family. Depending on the severity of the crime, generations to come may suffer from the
punishment of the devta. There are other devtas that are also associated with forests and worshipped
at temples dedicated to them. The more prominent ones are Binsar, Latu and Bhairavnath. Some
devtas that are worshipped at forest sites without temples are Heeth, Jaman Singh, Deo Singh and
Bhau Singh.
Sacred groves are mainly constituted of oak forests, which hold great significance in the lives
of the hill people by providing leaves for fodder and compost for agriculture. Many of these also
contain perennial springs, indicating the significance of these groves in conserving watersheds.
Management of sacred groves

Sacred lake in Munsiari Photo: Pankaj Sekhsaria

Sacred groves are not managed the way reserved or panchayat forests are managed, as there
are no formal rules to govern them. The basis here is a firm belief and faith in a deity and not in
some secular power. Once a forest becomes sacred, harming it in any way becomes taboo. Cutting
of a tree or even a branch is prohibited and hunting is out of question. In some sacred groves, no
one can take away any forest produce. However, in most places there are no restrictions to collect
twigs and branches fallen on the forest floor. Fear of the deity prevents any violation of these
rules.
Current scenario
In many places, sacred groves are under grave threat. As population pressure mounts and
the fear of the unknown gets reduced, people cross the forbidden boundaries. Also, as the legal
status of these forests is highly skewed—some of the sacred groves are van panchayats while a
few others are Reserved Forests—unclear legal status and judicial control confuse the surrounding
population, leading towards indifference. In many places the timber mafia is ruthlessly exploiting
these vulnerabilities. For example, the sacred grove around Jageshwar shrine is under threat from
a powerful local leader, a block pramukh (head) who runs a furniture factory at Artola, a village
three kilometres from the shrine. In village Eradi of Pithoragarh District, some part of the forest
that was offered to a local deity in 1997 has not only been encroached but also used to extract
fuelwood for small commercial enterprises. Market forces coupled with overall deterioration in
governance on the one hand and loss of faith on the other is largely responsible for a slow demise
of sacred groves in Uttarakhand.
Revival of sacred groves
The past few decades have seen serious degradation of forests in Uttarakhand. People in
Uttarakhand are well aware of the fragility of their ecosystem and the ecological and social
disasters that can be brought about by this degradation. Despite having a tradition of strong
system of management, awareness about the need of such a management and a strong interest
in conserving the resources, most communities have found it extremely difficult to decelerate
the process of degradation. Increased government interference, increased petty local politics,
migration of able-bodied youth from the villages, among other reasons have led to the breakdown
of the van panchayat, and lath panchayat systems in most villages resulting in unregulated and
indiscriminate use of the resources in these forests. Increased human and cattle populations
juxtaposed with the depletion in available resources have caused a situation of desperation strong
enough to overcome the fear of the wrath of the deity and sacred groves are now gradually being
 Uttarakhand 727

violated. Consequently, resource depletion, drying-up springs, loss of lives and property due to
frequent landslides and flash floods, migration of youth to the plains in search of employment, and
increased hardships for women have become a way of life for the people of Uttarakhand.
It is under these circumstances of helplessness, when solutions were forthcoming neither from
within the community nor from the government, that dozens of villages in Kumaon region of
Uttarakhand decided to turn to the goddess of forests. Forests, which were being managed for local
use, are now devoted to the goddess of the forest for protection. The phenomenon of sanctification
of community managed forests started as a movement in the region sometime towards the end of
1980s. Most villages follow a similar process for sanctification. A decision is taken by some elders
or respected individuals in the village to devote the forests to the goddess. A letter is written to the
goddess specifying the rules and regulations and the time period for which the forests have been
sanctified. A religious ceremony is performed in the forests to declare their sanctification. Usually
the oak forests (and not the pine forests) falling under the village are sanctified for a specified
period of 5 or more years. During the period of protection collection of live biomass or fallen leaves
is strictly prohibited, while livestock grazing and collection of dry twigs for fuelwood is allowed. In
special cases permission can be sought from the goddess to use some resource for community use.
Those who do not adhere to the rules face ill health or misfortune. The goddesses to whom these
forests are devoted are among the most feared goddesses in the region.80

3.5. Mahila mangal dals and youth groups

Other widespread community forest management systems outside any formal legal framework
are found in all categories of forest lands within or near villages include those managed by mahila
mangal dals (village women’s associations), informal van samitis and youth groups. Such systems
are particularly prevalent in villages away from major roads due to the commons still being central
for sustaining the local subsistence economy. These systems are regenerating and regulating
use of reserve and civil/soyam forest lands, often compelling unofficial cooperation by Forest and
revenue department staff.
Holta, a village without a van panchayat, initiated protection of its soyam land around 1986
entirely on its own. Village water sources had dried up and firewood and fodder had become
scarce as a result of unregulated forest use by surrounding villages and encroachment on common
land by local families. Some village youth successfully persuaded the encroachers to vacate the
commons, setting an example by giving up their own encroachments. Letters were sent to the
pradhans of surrounding villages that anyone entering the forest would be fined. Major conflicts
followed with one village going to court against Holta due to unclear boundaries of their respective
soyam lands. However, with improvement in forest condition and availability of water, resistance
declined. Today the village’s biomass needs, excepting those of timber, are being met from the
regenerated forest. Vegetable cultivation has become feasible with regeneration of three natural
water sources. Rules framed for grass, tree leaf fodder and firewood collection and are strictly
enforced, with all households contributing to pay a watchman.
The committee had representation from all hamlets and castes, and women representatives of
the village mahila mangal dal, empowered by the government’s mahila samakhya programme,
have also been able to wedge their way in. Community relations with the forest department,
however, are extremely sour. In the words of the village women, the department has made them
into thieves. While they protect their own forest like their children, they look the other way when
fire breaks out in the reserved forest.81 In Makku and Bareth, women’s groups had asserted
informal control over patches of civil or communal land closer to their settlements for day-to-day
management for firewood and fodder.82 In both cases, the women perceived local van panchayat
state chapter - uttarakhand

councils to be male domains. Panchayat forests were also far from the villages, and therefore not
convenient for daily fuelwood and fodder collection. The formal and informal CFM arrangements
complemented each other with the women occupying informally carved out space. They could
access such space with mediation of the gram sabha without having to deal with cumbersome
official procedures. In Arakot village, the mahila mangal dal had been protecting the village soyam
land for the past 20 years, paying a watchman with voluntary contributions. In Naurakh and
Resal, civil land was being protected by individual families through private enclosures. Officially
‘encroachment’ on government lands, such informal systems are fairly widespread as these have
low transaction costs.83
728 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Box 2
Movement against mining in Kataldi village84
Hemwalghati was one of the centres of the pioneering Chipko movement in the 1970s. In
the decades that followed, the people of this valley have been involved in several sustained
environmental protection initiatives including community-based conservation, forest
regeneration and the Harit Himalaya campaign.
Limestone mining was first undertaken around Kataldi village, lying in the heart of Hemwalghati,
between 1974-79. Strong opposition from local communities forced the mining operations
to close. Many subsequent attempts at mining have also been unsuccessful due to strong
opposition of the local people. People of the area, especially the women, are clear that they
will oppose any attempt at mining. They launched a determined non-violent dharna all through
December of 2001 to make their views known. A 30-year lease has since been granted to
M/s Parvatiya Mineral Industry Ltd. to extract limestone from 5.26 ha of common lands right
above Kataldi village. This is a cause of great worry to local people and they are aware of the
detrimental effects mining would have on their homes, drinking water supplies, agricultural
yields, fodder and fuelwood availability and the biodiversity which they have struggled to
conserve.
The people of Kataldi and other villages of Hemwalghati are determined not to allow the mining
to take place. After having petitioned the concerned offices in the state with little success, they
are currently preparing to take the matter to the Supreme Court.85

3.6. Other initiatives

3.6.1. Private Forests
In the post-independence era, the emergence of private forests lovingly and reverentially tended
by individuals is being increasingly seen. These stand out as oases in a sea of barren brown. Some
noticeable examples are Jagat Singh ‘Jangli’ of Jasoli village, Sobhan Singh Bhandari of Nagchaund,
Visheshwar Datt Saklani of Pujargaon, and Narayan Singh Negi of Sankot, Narayanbagar block.
Jangli has received a national award for his contribution to spreading environmental awareness. An
ex-army man, he was inspired by his father to create a forest on unproductive family land, resulting
in 50,000 trees of 50 native species cutting across altitudinal ranges. V.D. Saklani has spent 40
years raising a banj oak forest on degraded scrubland from seed, each one sown personally with a
prayer for its health and survival.

3.6.2. Maiti andolan

A new initiative, the maiti andolan, involves all unmarried girls in a village forming a maiti
sangathan to raise saplings of useful trees. At every wedding in the village, the groom is presented
with a sapling and the bride and groom plant it together. The groom gives a donation to the maiti
sangathan to help with the maintenance of their tree, and to help with raising other trees. Funds
created in this way have also been used to support the education of girls from economically deprived
families, and even to help out elderly women in distress. Shri Kalyan Singh Rawat, a teacher at
the Gwaldam Inter College, now based at Gauchar, Chamoli District, originated this idea. In an
estimated 200 villages spread across Uttarakhand (including Dharchula in Pithoragarh district,
Karnaprayag, Gwaldam and Gairsain in Chamoli district, Budhakedar in Tehri-Garhwal district and
Naugaon and Rajgarhi in Uttarkashi District), approximately 5000 ha of civil/soyam forest lands
have been handed over to maiti sangathans to protect, plant and manage as maiti vans.

4. Conclusions
In today’s world, with the increasing spread of education, the population of Garhwal finds
itself becoming increasingly bewildered about the future. The region, unlike others with forest-
based economies like Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, has a populace with decidedly middle-class
aspirations and expectations. The educated youth are increasingly frustrated by the perceived lack
of employment opportunities in the region. They see no future in the traditional way of life and
traditional professions. Whereas 90 per cent of the population live off agriculture, animal husbandry
and processing of forest produce, now the only future they seek is in secure government jobs with
pensions to cover old age.
 Uttarakhand 729

As traditional lifestyles have been gradually replaced by consumerist values, a preoccupation with
jobs as the ultimate security has resulted. Faith in traditional spirituality has eroded tremendously
with the growing influence of the cash economy. The steady ingress of roads into remote areas has
certainly brought convenience and ease of access. At the same time, they have trucked in modern,
globalisation-influenced values, eroded local culture and many positive traditions.
Nature has been made into a commodity. People’s systems of conservation and forest management
over centuries of living close to the land have suffered immeasurably. The youth displays alienation
from the land. The importance of agriculture, animal husbandry and consequently forests has
been steadily decreasing in the village economy. A tendency is manifesting itself in the educated
youth to agree with the official viewpoint that villagers are the destroyers of forests out of sheer
ignorance and apathy, while the state is exclusively the protector.

Darab Nagarwala is a member of PRAKRITI (Society for Promotion of Sustainable Livelihoods

from Nature), Mussoorie. He was assisted by Trepan Singh Chauhan and Pritam Appachhyan.
Rakesh Agarwal is an independent researcher and writer. This chapter quotes research conducted
by Madhu Sarin for CIFOR and published as ‘From Right Holders to Beneficiaries: Community
Forest Management, Van Panchayats and Village Forest Joint Management in Uttarakhand’
(CIFOR, 2001).

Endnotes
1
S.P. Singh and J.S. Singh, ‘Analytical Conceptual Plan to Restore Central Himalaya for Sustainable Development’,
Environment Management, Vol. 15, No 3 (1991).
2
Source: Government of UP, 1998
3
M.P. Joshi, Uttarakhand Himalaya (Almora, Sri Almora Book Depot, 1990).
4
Consisting of animal dung, partly decomposed leaves used for bedding, and fodder residue.
5
J.S. Singh and S.P. Singh, Forests of Himalaya (Nainital, Gyanodaya Prakashan, 1992).
6
Princely state
7
E.T. Atkinson, The Himalayan Gazeteer (New Delhi, Cosmo Publications, 1882, reprinted 1989)
8
Ajay Rawat, History of Garhwal 1358–1947 (New Delhi, Indus Publishing Co., 1989)
9
(As above)
10
The Annual Administration Report of Tehri State, 1943-44, states: ‘Indiscriminate destruction of natural fauna is
strictly forbidden and for the protection of wildlife, shooting permits are given in very special and rare cases. Besides
there are several sanctuaries all over the state where shooting and fishing are prohibited.’ Quoted in Rawat, History
of Garhwal. (As above)
11
G.B. Pant, The Forest Problems of Kumaon. Shree Almora Book Depot (Almora, reprinted edition)
12
For instance, the forests of Jaunsar Bawar, North of Dehradun, near Chakrata. See Atkinson, The Himalayan
Gazeteer, pp. 833-4, 869-72. (As above)
13
Neeru Nanda, Forests for Whom? (New Delhi, Har Anand Publications, 1999).
14
According to Nanda (Forests for Whom?) revenues doubled to Rs 300,000 annually at a conservative estimate.
15
G.F. Pearson, ‘Sub-Himalayan Forests of Kumaon and Garhwal’, in Selection from Records of the Government of
the North West Provinces. Quoted in Nanda, Forests for Whom?
16
Nanda, Forests for Whom? (As above)
17
Atkinson, The Himalayan Gazeteer. (As above)
state chapter - uttarakhand

18
Nanda, Forests for Whom? (As above)
19
A.E. Osmaston, Working Plan of North Garhwal Forest Division 1921-22 to 1930-31. (Allahabad, Government Press,
1921). Quoted in Nanda, Forests for Whom?
20
Atkinson, The Himalayan Gazeteer. (As above)
21
E.P. Dansey, Working Plan for the Garhwal Forest Division, 1879-80.
22
W. Coombs, Working Plan of Landsdowne Forest Division, 1930. Quoted in Nanda, Forests for Whom? p. 36. (As
above)
23
Nanda, Forests for Whom? (As above)
24
(As above)
25
(As above); Ramchandra Guha, ‘Van Panchayats in Uttarakhand: A Case Study’, Economic and Political Weekly,
25 September 1999.
730 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India
26
Nanda, Forests for Whom? (As above) Sarin, ‘From Rights Holders to Beneficiaries’. (As above)
27
Sarin, ‘From Right Holders to Beneficiaries’.(As above)
28
Atkinson, The Himalayan Gazeteer. (As above)
29
Ajay Singh Rawat, Forestry in Central Himalaya (Nainital, Centre for Development Studies, 1998).
30
Ramchandra Guha, The Unquiet Woods (New Delhi, OUP, 1989); and Ramchandra Guha, ‘Paryavaran Par Ek
Prarambhik Bahas’, Pahar, Vol. 9, 1998.
31
Sarin, ‘From Right Holders to Beneficiaries’. (As above)
32
Thakur Jodh Singh, B. Negi (MLC, Garhwal), Mr R.G. Marriot of the Indian Forest Service and Pandit Lachmi Datt
Pande representing Almora were other members of this committee.
33
See ‘Report of the Forest Grievance Committee for Kumaon’, in Ramesh Pande ‘Krishak’ (ed.), Van Panchayat
(Tehri Garhwal, Bhuvaneshwari Mahila Ashram, 1994), pp. 162-79.
34
Independant village council.
35
Rawat, History of Garhwal. (As above)
36
The consumption of printing and writing paper increased from 100,000 tons in 1948 to 405,000 tons in 1970, and
paper board from 46,000 tons to 158,000 tons.
37
The extraction of industrial wood jumped from 4.46 million cubic metres (MCM) in 1956-7 to 9.28 MCM in 1966-7.
38
Government of India, ‘Plywood Industry May Run Short of Timber’, Commerce, Vol. 126, No. 3231, 7 April (1973),
quoted in Akhileshwar Pathak, Contested Domains (New Delhi, Sage Publications, 1994).
39
S.S. Negi, Garhwal, the Land and People (New Delhi, Indus Publications, 1994).
40
M.D. Chaturvedi, 1948. The Role of Leaf Fodder in the United Provinces (Allahabad, Govt. Press). Quoted in Nanda,
Forests for Whom? (As above)
41
Nanda, Forests for Whom? (As above)
42
Sarin, ‘From Right Holders to Beneficiaries’. (As above)
43
(As above)
44
Thakur et al. in Sarin, ‘From Right Holders to Beneficiaries’. (As above)
45
Nanda, Forests for Whom? (As above)
46
Personal communications with Trepan Singh Chauhan in Chimiyala, 2000; Ratan Mani Gaur in Airi, 1998; Dhoom
Singh Negi in Khaddi-Jajal, 1996; Vijay S. Jardhari in Jardhargaon, 1996; and Devendra Bahuguna in Silyara,
1998.
47
Nanda, Forests for Whom? (As above)
48
Out of the 67 per cent of Uttarakhand’s area classified as forests, about 69 per cent is Reserve Forests exclusively
under the FD’s jurisdiction. The rest, comprising of civil/soyam and van panchayat forests falls under the Revenue
Department and the van panchayat jurisdiction respectively, with the FD responsible for technical supervision.
49
Rawat, History of Garhwal. (As above)
50
Based on field study by Neema Pathak, Kalpavriksh.
51
(As above)
52
Contributed by Neema Pathak, Kalpavriksh, Pune (November 2002).
53
Pritam Appachyan and Trepan Singh Chauhan, Chamiyala, Tehri Garhwal, personal communication, (2000).
54
Personal communication with Ashish Kothari, founder-member, Kalpavriksh, 2002
55
J. Suryanarayanan and P. Malhotra with R. Semwal and S. Nautiyal, ‘Regenerating Forests, Traditional Irrigation
and Agro-biodiversity: Community Based Conservation in Jardhargaon, Uttar Pradesh, India’, Case study for South
Asian Regional Review of Community Involvement in Conservation, sponsored by the International Institute of
Environment and Development under its ‘Evaluating Eden’ project (Kalpavriksh and IIED, unpublished, 1999).
56
See R. Agrawal, ‘Lath Panchayats: Fading Away’, Economic and Political Weekly, 6 January (2001).
57
Although leasing was, and still is, permitted.
58
This included timber.
59
Based on a study of van panchayats, done by the Academy of UP Administration (Forest Department, Uttar
Pradesh) Village Forest Joint Management Rules, August 30, 1997:3.1. Lucknow. Due to a rapid recent increase in
the number of VPs through conversion of civil/soyam lands into village forests, the figures in different publications
lack consistency. According to another source, there were 6016 VPs covering an area of 4,53,695 ha by March 2000.
(Dubey et al, 2000: 41).
60
Thus both the institution of the van panchayat and the village forests under their management are legally
constituted. This is in contrast to administrative orders governing village institutions and forest lands brought under
JFM in other states. Sarin, ‘From Right Holders to Beneficiaries’. (As above)
 Uttarakhand 731
61
See section on revision of VP Rules in 1976.
62
Some of the recently constituted ones in Nainital district have as little as .02 ha! In contrast, Makku VP, one of the
case study villages in this volume, has a village forest of 2200 ha.
63
E. Somanathan, ‘Deforestation, Property Rights and Incentives in Central Himalaya’, Wasteland News, Vol. VII,
No. 1, Aug-Oct (1991).
64
Nirja Gopal Jayal, ‘Democracy and Social Capital in the Central Himalayas: A Tale of Two Villages’, Unpublished
manuscript (1999). Uppsala Conference.
65
Kumaon Forest Fact Finding Committee (GOUP 1960: 33)
66
State Planning Division (GOUP 1984: 28).
67
Sarin, ‘From Right Holders to Beneficiaries’. (As above)
68
(As above)
69
N.C. Saxena, Towards Sustainable Forestry in the U.P. Hills (Mussoorie, Centre for Sustainable Development,
1996).
70
A common strategy used by the VP leadership to cope with this restriction is to maintain two sets of accounts:
an official one subject to audit by the Van Panchayat Inspector, and an unofficial one, in which fines, voluntary
contributions, and fees are deposited for running the VP’s day-to-day affairs. The all-women panchayat council of
Dungri Chopra deposits such panchayat income in the mahila mangal dal account for the same reason.
71
Sarin, ‘From Right Holders to Beneficiaries’.(As above)
72
(As above)
73
(As above) Makku van panchayat, one of our case studies, also has an ongoing court case against the Garhwal
Mandal Vikas Nigam for encroaching on 150 nalis of the VP’s land when it was leased only 3 nalis for building a tourist
guest-house. The VP is also trying to prevent a government cattle breeding farm from encroaching on land in excess
of that leased to it.
74
These include calling and presiding over VP meetings, getting all VP works executed, maintaining the VP’s accounts,
supervising VP employees, maintaining all the specified files, undertaking correspondence on behalf of the VP, filing
or defending court cases on behalf of the VP, etc. For all these responsibilities, s/he is entitled to spend the grand
sum of Rs 50, a sum not revised since 1976!
75
Atkinson, The Himalayan Gazeteer. (As above)
76
Uttam Singh Sayana, Munsiari, Pithoragarh, 1999 and Trepan Singh Chauhan, 2000, Chamiyala, Tehri Garhwal,
personal communication.
77
For instance, aanchri or souls of dead girls are said to inhabit bugyaals.
78
Y.D. Vaishnav, Land and People: Himalayan Districts of Uttar Pradesh (Almora, Sri Almora Book Depot, 1983).
79
E.S. Oakley, Holy Himalaya (Nainital, Gyanodaya Prakashan, 1905, reprinted 1990).
80
Information based on field study
81
Interestingly, the youth had applied for forming a VP 6 years ago but had received no response from the
administration. Asked why they wanted a VP when their informal system was working so well, the men felt that
VPs had greater access to government funds for plantations. They had heard about generous budgets for VFJM. The
women, in contrast did not want any funds or government scheme. They were proud of their regenerated forest from
which they could meet their biomass needs.
82
According to the ex-sarpanch of Makku VP, firewood and fodder scarcities are increasing conflicts over forests with
women even having to resort to physical fights. He had encouraged the village women to enclose patches of civil and
communal gram sabha lands for meeting their needs, while saving them from encroachments by the elite. He and
the women faced a lot of resistance from powerful vested interests. Husbands objected as they were forced to do
house work while women patrolled. However, effective protection by the women has led to dramatic regeneration of
the mahila bans (women’s forests).
83
Sarin, ‘From Right Holders to Beneficiaries’. (As above)
state chapter - uttarakhand

84
Contributed by Kanchi Kohli, Kalpavriksh, Delhi, November 2002.
85
Editorial note: As of late 2006, the resistance was still going on, with the court having left the matter to the district
administration to resolve. Vijay Jardhari, personal communication.
 CCA/UK/CS1/Bageshwar & Pithoragarh/Dharamghar/Forest protection

Dharamghar region, Bageshwar and Pithoragarh

Background
This case study looks at the innovative manner in which several rural communities in Kumaon
region of Uttarakhand tried to conserve their van panchayat forests1 when all other means were
proving ineffective. Changing social, economic, and political circumstances in the region have
resulted in a recent breakdown of the forest-guard system of protection of panchayat forests. As
a last resort for conserving the deteriorating forest resource base, villagers here have resorted to
the customary means of resolving land conflicts, which entails sanctification of land and appealing
to the local goddess of justice for appropriate action. This study presents the phenomenon of
sanctification, and analyzes the ecological impacts of this dynamic process on one hand, and
villagers’ adaptation to the process to the closure of village forests on the other. Using the political
ecology framework and common property literature, the study attempts to understand the reasons
for the collapse of the van panchayats, the motivation for forest sanctification, changes in inter-
and intra-village patterns of resource use, and the ecological implications of forest sanctification.

The study area

Referred to as the Dharamghar region in Kumaon, the study area incorporates villages scattered
along the tributaries of the Ramganga and the Saryu rivers, at altitudes between 1500-2000
above mean sea level of the Lesser Himalayas. The villages lie on the border of two administrative
districts of Kumaon: the Pithoragarh and the Bageshwar districts. All villages studied lie within the
Berinag block of Pithoragarh district and Kapkot Block of Bageshwar district.

Disintegration of local commons management

Villages in this region as in other rural areas are under the influence of economic, social and political
changes. Since local management systems are embedded in these broader social structures, the
interconnected web of these changes has heavily influenced both the informal (shramdaan) and
formal (van panchayat) systems of commons management in recent years. Thus, migration and
unavailability of male members of the community, differential economic opportunities between the
rich and the poor, and increasing differential in local dependence on resources within the village
society have led to the emergence of managerial difficulties in the protection of panchayat forests.
Mismanagement of these commons is also exacerbated by weakening systems of rule enforcement
as they existed based on social, moral and, to some extent, legal sanctions. Management and legal
sanctions have also been influenced by structural problems, embedded in government policies
relating to van panchayats, which have contributed to the disintegration of these local institutions
of management of panchayat forests. Despite difficulties posed by these changes however, and
despite the changing dependence on panchayat forest resources, there is continuing interest among
villagers across social classes in maintaining healthy panchayat forests. In response to the crisis
of panchayat forest degradation and continued interest in preventing degradation, villagers in
the Dharamghar region have attempted to redesign the system of panchayat forest management
based on the use of supernatural sanctions.

Towards reviving community conservation

case studies - uttarakhand

The meaning and mechanics of sanctification

The merging of sacred and secular in mythology and practice, and the conscious use of the
sacred in secular concerns is nothing new in rural societies. Sanctification of panchayat forests
represents one such conscious effort of ascribing to the supernatural in forest management
concerns. Here villagers appear to have resorted to the supernatural due to the lack of a secular
solution to the problem of encroachment in these panchayat forests. The nature of sanctification
in this case however straddles between the customary means of resolving conflicts and seeking
of justice against violators of forest rules reflected in the spatial dimensions of sanctification on
the one hand, and a renewed attempt at forest management suggested in the temporal limits of
sanctification on the other.
A total of 25-30 van panchayats in this region have sanctified their forests for the purposes of
conservation. Sanctification in each of these cases is limited primarily to the oak zone, although
not all van panchayats in the region lying within the oak zone have sanctified their panchayat
733
734 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

forests. The research presented here encompasses interviews conducted

in villages of ten van panchayats, eight of which had sanctified their forests
and two that had continued management through secular means. Five van
panchayats that had sanctified their forests formed the focus of this study.
The first van panchayat was sanctified in 1992. Villages incorporated in
all these van panchayats lie adjacent to each other, with the respective
forests sharing its boundaries.
The process and logistics of sanctification is similar for all the van
panchayats. Each of these van panchayats sanctified its forests for a period
of five years. Each van panchayat also sanctified its entire panchayat
forest, accept those panchayats that had under their jurisdiction pine
The Cheer pheasant’s forests. In addition, the basic rules of forest use under the forest-guard
habitat is protected system of management remain the same as under sanctification. Neither
in the community of the systems allows the removal of live (biotic) resources from village
conserved forests of forests, although both systems do allow for livestock grazing in these
Dharamgarh Photo: forests. Entrusting the forests to the deity has however resulted in slight
Raghavendra Singh variation between the two types of management, and therefore variation
in forest use. Two of the main differences between rules of forest use
under the guard system versus the rules of sanctification are: opening
of forests on specific days during the winter months for the collection of fodder leaves, and the
removal of understorey, especially thorny shrubs for use as fuelwood, both allowed under the
forest guard system. With management of the forests accorded entirely to the deity, forests are no
longer opened for green leaf collection, nor is the removal of understorey allowed. Only dry wood
(branches) may be lopped or collected from the forest floor to be used as fuelwood. Despite the
fact that rules of forest use under the two systems remain for the most part unchanged, the actual
use of panchayat forests has changed significantly in most of these villages.

Political dimensions of sanctification

Given that any decision-making is inherently political, sanctification of forests also remains a
political process. Interviews, especially in the first few villages that sanctified their forests in
the region, leaves little doubt that the decision on sanctification came primarily from the elite.
Sanctification in this case was not motivated by the elite asserting control over the forest; however,
it is political in the level of democracy involved in the decision-making. In villages where the
decision-making process was more or less democratic, the process remains political on who voices
the decision, on what areas are sanctified, and on the time period of sanctification. With these
specificities of sanctification left to the elite, concerns of those who are not in the positions of
decision-making, which include the poor and the women, are neglected. Apart from the process of
decision-making involved, there has also been differential impact of sanctification on the various
classes of village society, the impact being greater on the poorer households with less access to
alternative resources.
The experience of forest sanctification has been considerably different among the various villages
studied. As noted above, while in some villages sanctification resulted out of a decision of the
village elite, in others the decision was arrived at collectively through relatively democratic means,
where the poor themselves recommended sanctification. This variation in the decision-making
can partly be explained by local politics within these villages, but it is better explained by the
community-based ‘chain reaction’ or catalytic effect that took place upon the sanctification of
forest by the first van panchayat in the region. The first few villages to sanctify their forests, share
their forest boundaries. Thus, sanctification of forests by one van panchayat created problems for
the adjoining van panchayats. In other words, villages that had collectively decided to sanctify
their forests were responding to the new problem of encroachment from neighboring villages of
the sanctified panchayat forests. This chain effect was combined with a lack of foresight on the
part of the villagers, including the decision-makers, on the unexpected ecological changes and the
changes in resource use patterns that were to take place in these villages. The problem may have
been exacerbated due to the lack of involvement of the women in the decision-making, leaving
a gap between intent of the decision-makers, primarily men, and practice of the forest users,
primarily women.
On a second visit to these areas in May 1999, it was found that several of the sanctified panchayat
forests had been desanctified upon completion of the five years. While one van panchayat had joined
the Joint Forest Management (JFM), another had reinstated the guard system on a temporary basis.
Only one village had creatively adapted the system of sanctification to continue for another five
years. This van panchayat sanctified a portion of the forest for three years, and upon desanctifying
this section, it aimed to sanctify the remaining portion of the forest for two years.
While this study focuses on the Dharamghar region, it appears that other van panchayats in Askot,
 Uttarakhand 735

Kapkot, and Koteshwar areas may have sanctified their forests as well. In addition, examples from
Tehri Garhwal noted in Neeru Nanda’s (1999) book Forests for Whom? Destruction and Restoration
in the U.P. Himalayas suggest that sanctification of panchayat forests may not be as localized as
might appear from the Dharamghar cases.

Impacts of sanctification
Changes in patterns of forest resource use since sanctification
Changes in patterns of resource use due to forest sanctification have been significant in this
region, with significant variations in adaptations among villages, as well as among the households
within each village. Intra-village variations are based on existing social heterogeneity reflected in
differences in land ownership, access to disposable cash income, and availability of adult labour
to assist in daily chores. Inter-village variations, on the other hand, have been defined partly
by problems of logistics of villagers’ ability of meeting their basic needs, in particular by the
ease of accessing alternative spaces such as secular government and private forests. Inter-village
variations have also been determined by the type of ecological regeneration that has taken place
since sanctification, and the resulting inability of accessing panchayat forests due to the growth of
an understorey dominated by daru halad and other prickly shrub species.
Changes in patterns of land and forest resource use confirm that the decision to sanctify panchayat
forest lands has wider repercussions than might be expected from the minor differences in rules
of forest use under sanctification. The resulting patterns of livestock grazing and fuelwood and
fodder collection suggest that sanctification has led to a spatial shift in the use of forests, resulting
in conservation of sanctified panchayat forests at the expense of greater pressure on civil, reserve
and private forests. Villagers’ adjustment to sanctification has also resulted in transitions in the
type of resources used, such as from oak leaves to the greater use of grass for fodder, and
increasing use of alternative fuel such as kerosene rather than dry wood, reducing the overall
pressure on local forests.
Although sanctification has in most villages provided means of enforcing forest rules in these
commons forests, the success of sanctification may in fact have been determined partly by an
underlying factor, namely, social relations. Limited access to panchayat forests has resulted in
hardships for most households encompassing all levels of the village society, yet transgressions
to the rules of sanctification, contrary to what might be expected, have been dominated by the
wealthier households, implying that transgressions have occurred more for convenience than for
meeting of basic needs. Sanctification has also ultimately resulted in the creation of differential
pressure on the various classes of the village society, for while the wealthier households have taken
advantage of the easily accessible alternatives or have transgressed the rules of sanctification, the
poor households wait until the panchayat forests are desanctified. (Transgressions by the wealthy
reflect not a lack of faith in the supernatural, but the greater risk-taking behaviour of these
households). In effect long-term success of sanctification may be limited by the lack of provision
of alternatives to panchayat forest resources.

Ecological change
The mixed temperate coniferous forests in this region are primarily the broad-leaved species
of mixed banj oak and its associates including rhododendron and other Quercus species. On the
lower elevations, particularly on south-facing ridges, are the dry temperate forests dominated by
the chir pine forests.
Ecological changes in these sanctified forests, primarily the mixed banj oak forests, have resulted
in enormous forest regeneration. This regeneration can be characterized by the rejuvenation of the
case studies - uttarakhand

overstorey, particularly the increase in crown density, changes in the maturity-class structure due
to the emergence of new oak and associated trees, changes in composition of forest vegetation in
some forests resulting from the excessive regeneration of specific shrub species, and changes in
discharge of water sources, as well as abundance of forest fauna. Some sanctified forests in the
region are also in effect being preserved rather than conserved, leading to unexpected changes in
the emerging floral compositions, particularly the overgrowth of Berberis shrub species, inhibiting
the regeneration of oak species in sanctified forests.
Ecological changes since sanctification have also taken on distinct spatial qualities. Thus, in addition
to the above reversal in trends of biophysical change in panchayat forests, pre-sanctification trends
of degradation in civil forests and large private forests in the region have been exacerbated due to
sanctification of panchayat forests. These regional level forest dynamics suggest that despite a net
decrease in the use of local forest resources, net degradation may in fact have accelerated due to
panchayat forest sanctification in the region.
736 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Conclusion and broader implications

In conclusion, this paper suggests that the use of supernatural sanctions has limited viability in the
long run, both in terms of conserving forest resources at the regional level as well as in its success
in limiting encroachment in panchayat forests for an unlimited time. More important are spiritual
and deep ecological responsible relations with the natural surroundings. Social sanctions based on
the mere protection of social reputation are unlikely to be effective. However, strong community
ties based on a moral economy are likely to be more effective, where the material conditions or a
group identity produces values that encourage cooperation. In other words, generating individual
responsibility to the commons and the community is likely to be much more effective in adequately
maintaining these areas than any form of sanctions. Where scholars have placed greater emphasis
on the strength of the legal system (and supernatural system of sanctions in this study may
be viewed as an attempt of strengthening the legal sanctions in its goal of strengthening the
monitoring and penalty system), this study shows that only one village that had strong community
bonds was able to successfully avert transgressions through these means. This does not imply that
legal sanctions are unnecessary, but that the maintenance of a cohesive community appears to be
indispensable.
Local institutional change that would prove particularly helpful would be more democratic decision-
making. This would include active participation of women, not because of the current emphasis
on the gender issue, but because today women increasingly happen to be the primary, and in
many households the sole, users of forests. The commons institutions will also need to adequately
address problems arising from political groups with divergent interests. For political exclusion,
often due to domination by a set of elites, leads to failed cooperation, resulting in ecological
degradation. Current human-environment relations in this region also suggest that meeting of local
needs are more of a priority for villagers than long-term sustainability. Hence, along with problems
of rule enforcement and management, technical issues will need to be sufficiently dealt with. Such
technical issues include the generation of fodder alternatives to prevent excessive lopping, and
attempting to ease off pressure experienced by women in accomplishing their daily tasks.
Both political ecologists and scholars of common property have criticized the determinism of
economic forces. This study agrees with the criticisms in assuming that economic forces revolving
around market and money economy and individual benefit will prevail and that human actions will
automatically be defined by these economic forces. However, in analysing the current trends of
socio-economic change, it is clear that alternative economic incentives in this region will continue
to rise for local communities. While local use of resources need not be defined by these economic
incentives, nor do local institutional arrangements need to cater to these incentives, the competing
incentives will however need to be understood adequately to understand villagers’ interest, or lack
thereof, in maintenance of local resources.
Local solutions such as sanctification of the commons will provide a solution as long as the
strategy provides a link in the adaptive process of seeking a balance between human needs and
the natural environment. Given that human relation to natural resources are defined by numerous
factors, individual and societal, and given the uncertainty of ecological change, it is necessary that
adaptive management takes place such that it allows constant adaptation to the changing human-
environmental circumstances. To this end, self-mobilization by taking independent initiatives
through active leadership is likely to be much more effective than constant reliance on external
institutions.

This case study has been compiled from a report of a study conducted by Safia Aggarwal
between February and November 1998, with updates from May 1999.

For more details contact:

Safia Aggarwal,
Dept. of Geography,
University of Hawaii at Manoa,
Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
Email: safia@hawaii.edu

Endnotes
1
Forests handed over to the democratically elected institution, called van panchayat, under the Uttar Pradesh Van
Panchayat Rules of 1931. For more details see Uttarakhand chapter in this volume.
 CCA/UK/CS2/Bageshwar/Simalgaon/Forest protection

Simalgaon, Bageshwar
Background
Simalgaon is located at a walking distance of 16 km form the district headquarters of Bageshwar.
Alternatively, it can be reached from Kanda which is located at a distance of 24 km from Bageshwar,
on the Berinag road. From Kanda, one has to walk 6 km to reach Simal Gaon. From Bageshwar
regular buses and jeeps ply on this road. Direct buses are available from Almora, Pithoragarh
and Delhi as well. The nearest railhead is Kathgodam, about 185 km away. The climate is semi-
temperate with the temperature climbing to 35°C during summer and remaining close to the
freezing point during winter. It receives a good amount of rainfall during the monsoon months. The
altitude varies from 1300-1600 metres above mean sea level.
There are 30 households in the village, with a total population of 178. Most households belong to
the Rajput community, although a few are Dalits. Agriculture and animal husbandry are the main
sources of livelihood of people. The cattle population is quite high, though it was difficult to arrive
at an accurate estimate. It is said that centuries ago the ancestors of these villagers migrated from
Rajasthan to settle in this remote part of Uttarakhand. There was a big forest here and people were
afraid of wild animals, so the then village head had no problem giving them some land to settle
down.
The area of the forest is 30 ha. It is mostly banj oak. In fact, the thick oak grove is so famous in
the entire area that the forest is called ‘Simal Gaon Ke Banj’. Even the village and the villagers are
known by the same name. However, some other species such as rhododendrons, mahal bamboo
and deodar also exist, though their percentage is low. These forests have a good wildlife population,
as hunting is strictly prohibited. Some species are kakar (barking deer), leopard, Indian wild boar
and ghurad. Birds such as red-billed blue magpie, pine bunting and chestnut bunting, munia,
rufous wood pecker, long-tailed mountain thrush, and several flycatchers are also sighted.

Towards community conservation

The village has a traditional system of forest protection for generations, called the lath panchayat.
In this system a stick rotates from one family to another for the whole year. The family at whose
door the stick is kept by the previous family has to go for forest patrolling and protection on that
day. However, in Simalgaon this system has been somewhat modified. All 30 households in this
village are members of the lath panchayat. Functioning of the lath panchayat is very informal.
Elders from each family usually take keen interest in protecting the forest. There is no formal rule
for a periodic meeting, though, if a need arises, the heads of the households are called upon for a
meeting. Meetings are usually held on some social occasion when all the families anyway gather
at some place in the village. No system of any kind of election exists.
To protect the forest, two types of patrolling are practised. The first is voluntary patrolling.
Anyone who has free time can patrol the forest; there are no rules about this. The second is the
system of keeping a constant vigil. As the forest is adjacent to the village, people keep a constant
vigil over it, and the moment they sight a thief or spot a fire they raise an alarm and people gather
to do the needful. No formal punitive system exists and when an offender is caught, an on-the-spot
case studies - uttarakhand

decision is taken. Usually, outsiders have to pay double the fine that a villager would pay.
For the people of this village, the forest is open round the year to collect dry leaves, fallen twigs
and branches and grass. Outsiders cannot collect any produce. Hunting is totally prohibited. Usually
there is no dearth of fodder and, if the situation demands, a part of the forest is open to harvest
oak leaves. ‘However, this is usually done only once in five years or so,’ says Ummed Singh, a
village elder and ex-pradhan. This facility again is for the residents of this village only. The matter
is decided in a meeting of all the households. A part of the forest is marked for harvesting and one
person from each family goes to collect leaves. Everyone has to go together. There is no limit for
an individual to cut fodder leaves, but no extra labour can be employed, nor can an outsider do this
job. Even the ultimate size of the oak branch that is permissible to be cut is decided in the meeting.
Anyone violating this rule is debarred from harvesting the leaves for the rest of the season.

737
738 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Oak is also used for making agricultural tools. To meet this requirement, each year some
trees (two to five) are marked and each family is given an equal amount of wood. The villagers
themselves do the job and the persons cutting trees are paid additional amount of wood in lieu of
labour charges. The neighbouring villages are sold 3-4 trees each year. For fuel, the villagers have
rights over the nearby reserved forest (RF) and most fuelwood comes from the pine forest.
Forest fires are the biggest threat to oak forests. ‘We try hard not to let fires rage through our
forest as we are vigilant enough to control them on time,’ says Laxman Singh, an elderly farmer.
Sometimes, even during the night, people fight fire to extinguish it. For regeneration, one part
of the forest is shut for a period of 5-7 years and no grazing is allowed there. This way, two
compartments of 4 ha each have been added to the forest during the last 17 years. There is a
reserve forest of pine at the edge of the jungle and people have to take care that chir pine does
not ingress into the oak forest.
The village earns some income from the forest, mostly by selling oak wood and dead and dried
trees to the neighbouring villages and by imposition of fines. Though not very significant, this
is usually spent for buying utensils, generator, tents, etc. and to organise social events. These
common utility articles are given to the villagers on a nominal rent that goes to the kitty of the
lath panchayat. No formal bank account has been opened for this. The money is kept with some
responsible elder in the village.

Impacts of the initiative

This is a very old institution, protecting its oak forest for a very long time. So, it was not possible
to compare the tangible results of protection. However, it can safely be said that people are getting
enough biomass for all their needs from this forest, and the forest too remains in a very healthy
condition.

Conclusions
The tradition of lath panchayats has worked in the hills of Kumaon for generations; however it
is gradually dwindling now as more and more of these institutions are either getting formalised as
van panchayats or youth are losing interest in such traditions.
Felling of any tree in areas above the height of 1000 m, whether privately owned or government
property is not allowed. In 1981, the Government of India imposed a ban on the felling of green
trees above 1000 meters by contractors for the State Forest Department for pulpwood and timber,
accepting one of the demands of the Chipko Movement in the late 1970s.
To harvest one’s own trees, one has to take permission from the district magistrate, who is
usually unsympathetic to the needs of the villagers. The permission is, therefore, almost never
given. In these circumstances and other factors affecting the village, some people, mostly youth,
are increasingly getting less enthusiastic about forest protection.

Compiled from information sent by Rakesh Agrawal, an independent researcher, in 2001.

For more details contact:

Rakesh Agrawal,
90-A, (M.I.G. Ist Phase), Indira Puram
P.O. Majra, Dehra Dun-248 171
 CCA/UK/CS3/Chamoli/Pakhi & Jalgwad/Forest protection

Pakhi and Jalgwad villages, Chamoli

Background
Pakhi and Jalgwad villages share the same van panchayat and gram panchayat. The van
panchayat was formed 19581 to protect an area of 240 hectares. Both villages are located in the
Chamoli District near Gopeshwar town, where the famous Chipko movement2 began in the 1970s.
These villages are also well known for the active participation of women and men from here in
the movement to stop the felling of their forests by the forest department during the Chipko
movement.
Out of the 180 households, only eight are scheduled castes and the rest are upper-caste Hindus.
The forest area consists of mixed species dominated by oak and rhododendron and a sprinkling of
deodar. Fuelwood, fodder, animal bedding, and some non-timber forest produce, rather than cash
income, are the primary benefits the villagers get from the forest.

Community forest management

Both villages have an active mahila mangal dal, whose leaders have received considerable
exposure during Chipko and still continue to interact with various NGOs, are also members of
Himvanti.3
One of the elected women van panchayat members has received training in marketing skills from
an NGO promoting economic development in villages and has successfully initiated the processing
of locally grown fruit into jams, pickles and juices. The villagers’ returns from fruit have increased
significantly since this time. The mahila mangal dal (MMD) is also empowered to wrest control over
the day-to-day management of the village forest from the male-dominated van panchayat council.
Prior to the introduction of the Government Village Joint Forest Management (VJFM) scheme in
1999, the MMD was involved in forest management in a number of ways:
• Made decisions about when to open the forest for grass, leaf and firewood collection, rules for
collection, fines for violations etc. and communicated them to the van panchayat.
• As no external funds were available, the women would repair the forest boundary wall with
voluntary work.
• They even employed a woman forest guard and paid her through voluntary contributions.
• Fines were collected by them and deposited in their account.
Women’s control over the forest enabled them to ensure that forest produce collection does not
interfere with periods of heavy agricultural work. Soon after the monsoon harvest, they would
open the forest closest to the village for grass collection. The furthermost forest was opened up
in December when all agricultural work was over and women could devote more time to collect
firewood and fodder before the snowfall. Cutting of bushes and pruning was undertaken from April
to May.
Before VJFM, the men-folk of the village did not concern themselves with forest protection
case studies - uttarakhand

work and left it completely to the women. The women attempted to coax the men into voluntary
patrolling, but the men refused saying that it was the women who needed the forest. The women
also complained that when outsiders came to enquire about Chipko, the men pushed the women
forward to speak with them. However, when it came to making important decisions related to the
village, the women were left in the dark.
On the introduction of the World Bank-aided VJFM scheme in 1999, and the availability of generous
funds for the van panchayat, there was a sudden gender-based shift of power and control. The
men suddenly became overenthusiastic about forest protection and employed three watchmen at
salaries of Rs 1,000 a month. After three months of working without a salary, when the sarpanch
offered the woman forest guard Rs 200, she refused to accept the payment. After a lot of arguing,
she was finally paid Rs 700 and then laid off on the grounds that it was difficult for a woman to
protect the distant parts of the forest.

739
740 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

The men also monopolised wage work in the nursery and only after strong protests were women
also employed. When no funds were available, the women were left to take care of matters with
voluntary labour, and when the money came in, women were labelled incapable of doing the
work.
The men were not entirely victorious in their takeover of forest management. The van panchayat
suffered a similar loss in local decision-making control to the forest department:
• Maintenance of a muster roll for wage work was taken over by the guard or forester instead of
the sarpanch.
• The villagers’ role in VJFM had been reduced to providing information for preparation of a micro-
plan and working as paid labour for forestry operations.
• Neither the men nor women were clear about the new VJFM rules or the legal agreement they
were supposed to sign.
• Neither was there a copy of the agreement in the van panchayat records, nor was there a copy
of the micro-plan with the sarpanch.

Conclusion
Although the current status of what is happening in the village is not clear at this stage, this
case study is a perfect example of how strait-jacketed and unimaginative policies and their
implementation can cause serious damage to well-established and effective community institutions.
This also shows how externally aided programmes can cause complete disruption in local social
and political powers, responsibilities and obligations, eventually threatening the natural base which
is crucial for the survival of local communities. External interventions therefore need to be well
thought-out and need- and context-based.

This case study has been adapted from: M. Sarin, Empowerment and Disempowerment of
Forest Women in Uttarahand, India. Gender, Technology and Development 5:341-364, Sage
Publications. (New Delhi/Thousand Oaks/London 2001).

For more information contact:

Ganga Gairola
CHIRAG (Central Himalayan Rural Action Group)
Nankuchiatal, Bhimtal – 263136
Nainital Dist.
Uttar Pradesh
Ph: 05946-47181

Endnotes
1
Geeta Gairola, ‘Field case study of VJFM with Pakhi Van Panchayat, district Chamoli’, unpublished (1999).
2
The Chipko movement was started in some parts of Garhwal in early 1970s against the policy of the state government
to clear fell the forests in the region. This policy attracted much opposition from the local residents as they depend
on these forests heavily for meeting both their every day needs, providing ecological functions, and for religious, and
aesthetic needs. Women from many villages where such fellings were planned came forward and hugged the trees
and dared the FD to chop them before hacking the trees. The government had to bring about substantial changes in
its policies as a result of this Movement.
3
A multi-country federation of mountain-womens’ organizations for the Hindukush Himalayan region.
 CCA/UK/CS4/Dehradun/Nahikalan/Forest protection and traditional agriculture

Nahikalan village, Dehradun

Background
On the first outer Himalayan range, overlooking the Doons, nestled in a valley called Sinsyarukhala,
is Nahikalan village in Dehradun District. The outer Himlayan range stretches across an altitudinal
range of approximately 3000 ft (from 2,500 to 5,500 ft). The gradient is often between 60 and
80 degrees. In striking contrast, the hilltops are flat or gently undulating with rolling meadows or
forests. The geology is extremely fragile. The area receives heavy rainfall, especially during the
monsoon months, called chaumasa in Garhwali. Over the last ten years or so, the rainfall pattern
(seasonal distribution etc.) has become highly unpredictable. The site is a critical catchment and
birthplace for perennial springs and streams, together birthing the river Bhidalna that later flows
into the Jakhan river. The natural springs of this area are the (often sole) sources of drinking water
for 12 nearby and downstream villages. More drinking and irrigation water projects are underway
and proposed. A combination of all these factors has bestowed this area with a unique and rich
biodiversity.
A range of landscape and forest types as well as ecological niches exist in this area. One of the
main forest types is the Temperate baan oak or silver white oak type, and others include moist
evergreen, mixed and deciduous forests, meadows, grasslands and agro-ecosystems. Baan oak
forests occupy the upper reaches of the hills. Most of the numerous natural springs of the area
emerge just below these forests and these exercise a determining influence on the climate and
ecology of the area. All the villages and hamlets are located strategically (often just) below the oak
line because this is the ideal place for water availability/security; fertile, moisture-retentive soil;
maximum proximity to year-round diverse wild fodders; etc.
The factors behind the rich and wild biodiversity (including wild floral diversity itself) have enabled
the evolution of diverse indigenous crops and varieties, further characterised by their organic and
rainfed nature.
The main occupations of people are agriculture and pastoralism. Some people are also employed in
government and private jobs, primarily as government schoolteachers. Agriculture and pastoralism
are symbiotically linked with each other and the neighbouring forests and grasslands. Pastoralism
is, if anything, more secure than agriculture, as agriculture depends upon the benevolence of the
skies and the crop-raiding wild animals.
Agriculture is characterized by its entirely rainfed nature, organic fertilization and a wide range
of indigenous crops and varieties. Numerous traditional fine and coarse cereals, millets, pulses,
tubers, vegetables and spices and condiments are grown to meet food and nutritional security and
incomes. For the area’s inhabitants these are the primary sources of sustenance and income. All
families possess agricultural land; the size of holdings varies, though far less than in most parts
of India. The landholdings of the few dalit families are marginal. Some other families too have
smallholdings. The two major caste groups are farming rajputs and dalits.
Three revenue villages—Nahikalan, Nahin khurd and Kotla and the hamlets of Barkot and
Semalsari with a total of 38 families (as of five years ago)—lie in the area. Most families own some
land in villages in the plains of the Doon valley. Parts of most families and some entire families
have migrated there. Some families live here and travel down 7-20
case studies - uttarakhand

kilometres to farm the land in the plains.

A minimum trek of 8 km is necessary to reach the roadhead/
bus stop. Basic needs such as health, education, and electricity
are intermittently and inadequately available. The nearest
school is about 16 km away.
Among the main tree species found in this area are banj oak, burans,
semla, tun, the now rare sandan, bheemal, timla, amla, baherha and
raini/rohini and kingorha, among others.
An impressive faunal diversity complements the floral diversity of the area.
Many species of herbivores, such as serow, sambar (jarhaoo), ghurar/goral,
barking deer(kakar); carnivores including tiger (bagh), leopard (baghera),
741
742 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

jungle cat (van billi) and leopard cat (ban bijju), Himalayan black bear (bhaloo), wild boar (Suar),
Rhesus macaque (bandar) and Hanuman langur (langurs), Himalayan yellow throated marten
(totriyala), Indian porcupine (saulla), rufous-tailed hare (khargosh) and a variety of rodents and
reptiles are found in the area. (Of the above, serow, Himalayan black bear, tiger, leopard and
leopard cat are on Schedule I of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.) This is in addition to a wide
diversity of avifauna, insects, and other invertebrates.
On the agricultural terraces of the area grow a vast array of indigenous Himalayan crops and
varieties, well adapted to the local agro-ecological niches. Completely rainfed and organically
grown, these diverse crops are dependent on neighbouring forests and grasslands for fertility and
a suitable agro-climate. Multi-cropping and crop rotation systems are elaborately worked out and
strongly believed in. The traditional crop rotation systems are, however, now undergoing changes.
Another defining feature is a traditional agroforestry system, with numerous and diverse useful
trees lining and stabilising the agri-terraces. Wild relatives of many cultivated crops like ginger,
turmeric, mandua/ragi, amaranthus varieties, sunti/lobia (cow pea), cucurbits and ridge gourd are
found in the area.
Considering the extremely steep slopes, with an average gradient of around 60 degrees, the
dominant rock types are fragile, loose and fractured. Given the exceptionally heavy, especially
monsoonal, rainfall, the only way these slopes remain stable is when they are covered with a dense
and diverse floral mantle.
In the last 15 years or so whenever there have been big threats to biodiversity and the
environment: extensive forest fires; excessive goat-grazing (particularly from the migratory
graziers); contractor-driven medicinal plant extraction; hunting (which was traditionally small-
scale but increased raiding and crop losses to wild animals, leading to anger and resentment,
provide a fillip to hunting); severe soil and rock erosion, landslips and landslides; mining etc.
Degradation and biodiversity loss have also depleted the exceptional water sources of the area.

Towards community conservation

For 25 years, till 1986, this rich, fragile valley saw reckless, wanton limestone mining. Never
sticking to the leased area, blasting all over the valley including village land, no mining plans or
inspections and continuing years after the lease got over—everything that can be wrong with
mining was so here. Boulders rained on homes and agri-terraces endangering humans and cattle;
perennial springs and streams choked under mining landslide rubble; and timber smuggling was
rampant. The biggest impact perhaps was how a mountain of blasted, loosened rock transfigured
the Bhidalna into an angry torrent of hurtling boulder and stone, swinging madly till it got lost in
an ever-widening boulder wasteland. Where once forests stood or agriculture thrived.
When reasonable requests were met with violence and arrogance, the youth of Nahikalan wrote
to the Chipko movement and Kalpavriksh (then a youth environment action group from Delhi) for
help.
Meetings, folk songs, slide shows, slogans, and innovative direct actions were soon in full swing,
invigorating and mobilizing the valley. The mining road was closed to trucks and trees were planted
on it; alongside came up a hut camp, Chipko activists dug pits to bury themselves in the way of
mining trucks; a memorial was made in the forest for hundreds of Hanuman langurs who died due
to indiscriminate blasting. Local women and youth were at the forefront, organized into Yuvak and
mahila mangal dals.
Soon, downstream villagers, dependent on this area for their drinking and irrigation water joined
up, and villages still further downstream whose lands were laid waste by the now stony Bhidalna
and Jakhan rivers.
Youth were inspired futher by Chipko movement slogans such as ‘Aaj Himalaya Jagega, pathar
wala bhagega! Paharh ki haddi tootegee, Desh ki dharti doobegee! Upar dekho jahan khadan,
neeche kheti, registan! Dongiya bagh, hatt, hatt, hatt!’ (‘Today the Himalayas rise to ensure that
those who are digging its rocks are stopped! Mining will break the mountains and flood the plains!
Mining in the hills will turn farmlands into deserts! O rock-eating leopard, go away!’) The Chipko
poet, Ghanshyam Sailani, composed a Garhwali folk song on the movement.
The movement was also strengthened by support from a small but enthusiastic band of
environmentally active individuals from the Doon Valley and way beyond. Money, iron rods,
revolvers, trucks…the mine owner tried all these. The local people responded with Gandhi-inspired
Chipko movement methods and their greater knowledge of the mountains to evolve ingenious
‘non-violent’ guerrilla tactics. As the violence and injustice grew, so did people’s determination.
 Uttarakhand 743

Many brave people refused to cower even in the face of threats to their lives. Realising or accepting
the value of non-violence, even when faced with an unscrupulous adversary, was a big challenge.
This was met by collective and individual creativity, the space for which was likely created by the
non-violent nature of the movement. Finally, local people’s resolve, the creative commitment of
Chipko veterans and diverse contributions from so many won the day.
This wanton mining was fought in the courts too and in the first environmental PIL (Public
Interest Litigation) before it, the Supreme Court ordered the mine closed. This became part of the
famous Doon Valley Limestone Mining Case, and all mines in the Doon valley were declared closed.
Some years later, the Union Environment Ministry declared the entire Doon Valley an Eco-Sensitive
Zone (under Section 3 of the Environment Protection Act), and mining is one of the prohibited
activities.

Degradation and revival in the 1990s

Quite a few years of lull followed. In 1995 some of the activists and researchers who were
associated with the anti-mining movement returned to the area and found significant new threats
to local environment and livelihoods. They then started a long Forest Yatra from this area, walking
through areas of the worst forest fires. The yatra’s focus, naturally, shifted to understanding the
causes behind increasingly frequent and widespread fires.
The full scale and intensity of changes underway dawned only in 1997-98, through the process
of making an action plan for wild biodiversity conservation for this area, as part of the nation-wide
Biodiversity Conservation Prioritization Project (BCPP). As the entire population of the area got
into collectively understanding and assessing the status and changes in their natural environment,
what emerged shocked everyone! Natural regeneration was strikingly absent, important plant
species were vanishing (most showed decline); exotic bio-invaders were replacing natives, there
was drying or reduced flow in natural springs; and frequent landslides, and landslips. Degradation
(often severe) was evident across sites—only the extent varied—as unbearable threats combined
to ravage biodiversity and threaten the hills.
How did such degradation occur within less than a decade of a passionate anti-mining movement?
Overall, long-standing neglect of basic needs and aspirations like education, health, transport,
livelihoods; changing social attitudes and declining community feeling; small government
programmes and a big watershed project bringing corruption alongside. Strong feelings of neglect,
disillusionment, and apathy were palpable, fuelling and fuelled by the growing movement for a
separate Uttarakhand state. The deepest bonds with environment and amongst the community
began to be ignored.
Vis-à-vis forests, an alienation from responsibility (with traditional dependence, rights,
conservation initiatives and role never clearly acknowledged), changing attitudes (including
taking natural resources for granted) and a virtually absent forest department (perhaps caused
or exacerbated by relative remoteness). Above all the fact that the entire community seldom met
anymore and the nature and pace of ecological changes was considerable.
A People’s Plan for Conservation of Wild Biodiversity (henceforth BCPP Plan) was formulated
and prioritized in elaborate village meetings. The local communities took on responsibility for
most of the strategies. Together with some village people, some reasearchers and activits who
facilitated environment and livelihoods aspect in the plan decided to formulate a group called
Vividhara. Vividhara was set up with the intention of implementing and monitoring what villagers
had together decided for the village during BCPP.
The fact that Nahikalan was selected as one of the sub sites for National Biodiverstiy Strategy
case studies - uttarakhand

and Action Plan provided Vividhara and the village an opportunity to evaluate what they had been
able to achieve between 1998 and 2002.
From 1998 started a phase of implementing the BCCP plan. Almost all initiatives were voluntary
community initiatives, often facilitated by Vividhara; only two programmes were supported through
small external funding for four months:
a) Awareness, sensitization and social mobilization
b) Lessening the human-wildlife conflict
To start with the biggest current threats were countered head-on. To meet the biggest threat of
frequent and devastating forest fires, villagers and Vividhara initiated an awareness and mobilization
campaign through evocative poems, slogans, songs, and posters, created in art sessions and
workshops with interested villagers, children and Vividhara members. Soon, frequented locations
744 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

like schools, water springs, forest paths, village walls, etc. hosted these art works. Village meetings
and children’s groups chose ways to prevent and control fires.
In 1999 the villagers of Nahikalan set out to control fires. On one such mission, along with
a large regenerating forest they also saved a village from being burnt. This created a positive
atmosphere for conservation initiatives across the valley. Wilful or accidentally lit forest fires are
now significantly low in this area.
While finalizing the plan, determined village women finally got the entire village to back their
priority issue of not selling forests to migratory goat herders, the second biggest threat to
forests.

Box 1
How the women managed to get their priorities addressed
“HUM TO NAHIN DAIN DINDA!”(We won’t let the forest be sold), said the women emphatically.
As the goatherders pay money to the village panchayat for forest use, it became a question of
money to the panchayat versus forest well-being and fodder availability, with the men thinking
about the money and the women about fodder and forest. Suddenly, it was women versus men
and the differing gender perceptions became strikingly apparent, though some men quietly
supported the women. The herders offered to double the money and more, from the existing
Rs 2500-3000. Even as the men got tempted, the women put their foot down. ‘You may get
Rs 50000 or a lakh, and you’ll sell the forest. But we don’t care about the money. We’ll chase
the goats away if they come. For good measure the men were warned that if the forest is sold,
from the next day, it will be the men who’ll go to the forest for fodder, and the women will stay
at home.’
This happened in the final meeting to formulate the BCCP Plan, in 1997. The women are clear
and determined to this day.

Controlling grazing by the migratory goat herders has protected significant tracts of top- and
middle-hill forests near the main village. The women continue to hold the village steadfast on this
and goats are at best allowed passage rights as earlier. The immense pressure of village goats on
proximate areas has eased too, with their numbers down to 20 from 125 (from 5 herds to 1). The
awareness initiative and falling goat prices have played a role in this.
Callous non-regenerative methods of fodder/fuelwood collection that were coming into vogue
have been substantially controlled through an awareness and sensitization approach based on
traditional knowledge.
The main village spring existed under perpetual fear of landslides, having been buried under one
such landslide twice within a decade. After discussions the Doon Valley Watershed Project agreed
to support the work of making check-dams and contour walls in this area and repairing a drinking
water tank for cattle. Reviving an old tradition the area above the natural spring was declared
out of bounds for goats and loppers. Later cuttings and saplings were planted by the community
through shramdaan (voluntary labour). Dramatic natural regeneration and enhanced water in the
spring can now be seen.
Since 1998, many experience-cum-work camps have been held for college students from Delhi.
These mutually enriching experiences have often been the high point for awareness and shramdaan.
Exposure to Himalayan biodiversity and the ecosystem and nature experiences through forest and
agriculture treks, acquaintance with the key challenges, first-hand experience of life and culture
in hill villages, interactions with villagers, voluntary work on chosen priority tasks along with
villagers, sessions with children at the activity center, cultural evenings and feedback sessions are
the main activities in these camps.
Many environment enthusiasts from different lands have also had rich stays and sharings. These
last two activities have been the Vividhara’s chosen version of eco-tourism. Based on the experience
and learnings of these years, the local communities are enthusiastic and there is considerable
scope for expansion.
In 1988, a library-cum-activity center, with nature and environment as focus areas, was started
in the panchayat ghar of Nahikalan. With its few hundred books and art materials, this is a favourite
space with the village children and some grown-ups. Story-telling, thematic posters, and singing
are other occasional activities. The teachers of the local schools and parents vouch for the positive
 Uttarakhand 745

learning and other effects this has had on the children. Several environmental workshops and
sessions have been held in the local schools and the enthusiastic students and teachers are keen
on Vividhara members continuing these activities.

Cultivated diversity initiatives

As stated earlier, the biggest threat before agriculture and agro-biodiversity is spiraling wild
animal raiding of crops. The first half of a two-pronged strategy involves enhancing water and
food availability in the forest habitat. To meet animals’ needs and regenerate the ecosystem, half
a dozen joharhs/pokhars (ponds/pools) were revived/made anew on hilltops and as many natural
springs were revived. Implementing actions for reducing threats of forest fires, goats, etc. helped
improve the food situation for animals. Over the last few years several innovative methods have
been identified and tried out, resulting in some reduction in crop losses. This complex challenge
however requires further engagement.
To counter economic and social devaluation of traditional organic agriculture, an organic food
marketing initiative was initiated in 1992, between the farmers of Nahikalan and consumers in
Delhi. This first organic food marketing experiment in Delhi revealed an enthusiastic niche market.
In 1995 this evolved in a collaboration between the farmers from Nahikalan and Beej Bachao
Andolan (Save the Seeds Movement, a pioneering farmers movement in the Garhwal Hills to save
dwindling Himalayan crops and varieties, see case study on Jardhargaon) facilitated by Vividhara.
Since then they have been participating in an annual exhibition on Himalayan cultivated (and some
wild) biodiversity and sale of organic foods and natural products. This is as part of Dastkar’s Nature
Bazaar, the best-regarded annual crafts mela in Delhi, at the popular exhibition site of Dilli Haat.
These exhibitions have reached a few lakh urban citizens. Small-scale direct selling and retailing
of their products through a few outlets is on through the year.
On the hill end, numerous farming families spread over six villages are getting higher returns
for their surplus crops, providing a fillip to several devalued and neglected indigenous Himalayan
crops with exceptional nutrional/medicinal attributes. Locally developed naturally processed
products, including pickles, chooran/mouth freshner, jams from (locally abundant) amla, a candy
from medicinal ginger, a traditional cough medicine, a natural insect repellent/air purifier from
a wild marigold relative, etc. are also being sold. As a result, cultivation of some locally suitable
crops is going up and hundreds of amla trees have been planted. The potential for expanding the
scale is immense and is needed to further benefits to more organic farmers and make healthful
organic foods available more widely at non-exorbitant prices.

Impacts of the initiative

Due to the above initiatives significant overall species and micro-site level changes/improvements
were observed in the ecological and biodiversity status of the area. The most striking and heartening
change is the natural regeneration of native floral diversity, including on the most degraded lands.
Local women specifically mentioned the return/regeneration of small trees of prioritized species.
Grassland management seems to have arrested further decline of important grass species and
some species have even shown an increase in numbers. Despite some efforts by people to control
the exotic species Lantana camara, it continues to exist in large expanses of land.
Landslide and landslip occurrence has shown a noticeable decline. Some years have had nearly
no landslides. Rock and gulley erosion has gone down. However, most of the check-dams and
gulley plugs are now filled with stones and soil and need some intervention. Soil moisture levels
case studies - uttarakhand

are also showing improvement.

Many natural springs now have increased water flow throughout the year or
longer seasonal flow. Local women feel the joharhs and pokhars on hilltops have
significantly helped in this and more joharhs need to be made for which they
suggested appropriate sites. Some revived springs need further watershed works
in their immediate catchments.
Most of these changes are nascent and fragile, merely indicating a
discernible change in trends towards the better. Local contextual factors
like steep slopes, heavy rainfall, predominantly south/south west facing
slopes are ever present.
As the village women warned, excessive goat grazing and/or rampaging forest
fires could wipe out the benefits in a year. The good efforts therefore must sustain
and more needs to be done.
746 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Opportunities and constraints

1. The efforts at environmental and ecosystem regeneration have meant an increase in wild fauna
populations. The incidents of crop raiding have increased manifold, making farming very difficult.
Local people, though very active in conservation efforts, are not happy with this increase in the
numbers of wild animals. Reactions against wild animals are very strong, particularly towards
wild boars, porcupines and monkeys, which cause maximum damage to the crops.
2. Another constraint that the villagers face is a total indifference and lack of support from
government functionaries, particularly the FD. According to the villagers, in the last 30 odd
years the FD has not addressed the major threats facing the forests. Remoteness due to lack of
a motorable road is probably the reason. According to all local accounts, the only time the forest
guards visit the area is when someone is building a house; he comes to collect fines or bribes
for timber use. And yet, there is an arrogance in the Department that they are the protectors
of the forests. All this breeds resentment and alienation from the department, which could have
been the greatest ally of the villagers.
3. A lack of recognition in the government departments, including the FD, and an ambiguity about
conservation responsibilities and ownership make continuation of this initiative difficult. The FD
can play a very significant role in the long-term sustainability of this initiative by recognizing
rights, roles and responsibilities and clearly defining areas of partnership. They also need to
recognize local villagers as their rightful partners in the management and protection of forests
and environment.
4. Changing social and cultural values and attitudes among the newer generations is a major
challenge to sustain this initiative. Growing needs and aspirations and large-scale out-migration
(usually of part of the family), external influence through TV, etc. if not handled appropriately, are
likely to have a serious impact on the initiative in future. Inadequately met basic developmental
needs of education, health, livelihoods, and lack of transport have generated strong feelings of
neglect and apathy amongst the villagers. The paradox of nearness and remoteness, perhaps,
fuels aspirations and makes their fulfillment difficult.
5. Inadequate availability of gainful livelihood and employment is a major challenge, priority and
concern. Any plans for biodiversity conservation in this area will need to address these issues,
to be effective and equitable.

This case study has been compiled from information in: Nahikalan Sub-state Site, Final Plan for
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Prepared by Vividhara in April 2003. Available in
a CD with TPCG and Kalpavriksh, Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report of the National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).

For more details contact:

Vividhara
C/o Bhopal Singh
Village Nahinkala
Post Sangaon
Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Ph: 0135-2659302
Or
Vividhara
C/o Ajay Mahajan
D-805, New Friends Colony
New Delhi 110065
Ph: 011-26913362
E-mail: ajaymahajan1@gmail.com
 CCA/UK/CS5/Nainital/Thapaliya-Mehra/Forest protection

Thapaliya-Mehragaon, Nainital
Background
Thapaliya-Mehragaon Van Panchayat is just a kilometre away from Naukuchia Tal, a well-known
lake, popular with tourists in Nainital district. The Tal is about 35 km from Kathgodam, and is well
connected to this nearest railhead. There are regular bus services from Haldwani and Nainital to
the Tal. The 1 km distance has to be covered on foot. The climate of the area is semi-temperate.
Temperature during summer shoots up to 34°C, while in winter it remains slightly above the
freezing point. It receives a good amount of rain during the monsoon months. The altitude varies
from 1100-1400 m.
There are 97 households with a total population of 587 in the village. Most households are
brahmins (about 75); 14 are rajputs and the rest dalits. Most people are engaged in agriculture,
though there are a few (about four or five) who are doing petty jobs in nearby hotels and resorts.
There is no artisan family in the village, though a few are masons. The cattle population is close to
700 heads. There are no goats in the village. In fact, Thapaliya-Mehargaon Van Panchayat comes
under one gram sabha but is comprised of two revenue villages: Vohra Gaon and Thapaliya-
Mehragaon. The total area of the van panchayat is 385 ha. Wildlife is not significant. The animals
most common in these forests include barking deer, leopard and monkeys. Before the initiative
started, the number of wild boars was very high. After the removal of lantana their population has
gone down. A few bird species such as red-billed blue magpie, pine bunting, blue robin, warbler,
yellow-billed blue magpie and yellow-throated minivet also live in the forest.

Towards community conservation

Although the van panchayat came into existence way back in 1950, the condition of the forest
under its control deteriorated by the 1980s. ‘The forest that was very dense and thick was slowly
razed to the ground by people and contractors. People faced immense difficulty to meet their
biomass requirements and fields became barren,’ says Mahendra Singh Varma, the ex-pradhan
(village head). Meanwhile, an NGO called Central Himalayan Research Action Group (CHIRAG)
started working in the area. The NGO was mainly carrying out land restoration and biodiversity
conservation programmes. In 1988 Varma approached the organisation to take up his van
panchayat under their project. The NGO agreed to take up one part of the forest and thus a unique
effort of restoration involving people and workers began.
CHIRAG encouraged the villagers to establish a van suraksha samiti (VSS) to protect the forest
and implement the restoration programme. There are eight members in the VSS, with four being
women. This committee is independent of the existing van panchayat committee, although the
members of the van panchayat can also join the VSS. There are two such persons who are members
in both institutions. The sarpanch of the van panchayat is invited to attend the monthly meetings
of the VSS, which are called on the first or second day of every calendar month. ‘The VSS takes
care of the project area and we are responsible for the entire forest and both bodies have similar
rules, so there is a lot of co-operation between us,’ says Rajendra Singh, sarpanch of the van
panchayat. ‘Both institutions want to protect the forest, so there is no question of conflict between
the two,’ Harag Singh Mahra, president of the VSS, echoes him. There is a third institution in the
village as well. It is the women’s group, which is a self-help group (SHG). This 12-member group
is engaged in saving and thrift activities. It was established in August 1999 and all four women
members of the VSS are also the members of this body.
case studies - uttarakhand

For the revival of the forest, the NGO along with the villagers adopted a policy on fresh plantations
and natural regeneration. Also, reducing pressure on the forest was considered a must. For
plantation, a meeting of the villagers was called. People suggested plantation of fodder and fruit
species. Every family of the village was taught how to raise a nursery on its own land. Each family
was initially given 10,000 saplings. Then they were given seeds. CHIRAG provided money to make
saplings, dig pits and to transport them to the forest. After some time, the NGO helped open
accounts in the name of women from these families in the nearest bank. The forest was kept totally
shut for five years to allow natural regeneration and protect new saplings. However, care was taken
to meet people’s biomass needs by providing them alternatives. First, they were convinced to sell
unproductive animals, mostly goats and additional loans were given to buy milch cows. People,
after some resistance, agreed. They were then provided gobar gas plants at subsidised rates. This
also became popular in the village. This helped reduce pressure on the forest and became crucial
in the success of the programme.
747
748 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

As already pointed out, the VSS meets every month to discuss plantation, protection and other
issues such as imposing fines on offenders. Although, the successful protection of the forest has
made people aware and they themselves protect forests, there are two chowkidars—one male and
one female—appointed by the VSS. The woman is an old but extremely energetic and dedicated
lady, Rewati Devi. It was a pleasure walking to the highest parts of the forest with this 65-year-
old guard of the wild. ‘I usually go to the forest in the night and hide to see if someone is harming
my trees,’ says an enthusiastic Devi. ‘She shouts at people and if they don’t respond, she starts
throwing stones at them,’ says Ganga Joshi of CHIRAG. However, Rewati rues that she gets only
Rs 400, too paltry a sum in these days. No grazing is allowed in the forest. Twice a year it is
opened to cut grass, and passes are issued for Rs 5 per sickle to people for this purpose. If there
is excess grass, people from neighbouring villages can also collect it for double the amount. For
special functions members can apply for fuelwood and for Rs 25 a bundle of wood is given to them.
Regulated lopping of trees for fuelwood is done under the supervision of chowkidars during the
winter and Rs 15 per person is charged for that. No harvesting of leaves is done.
The VSS also has a number of punitive rules. If anyone is caught stealing grass, a fine of Rs 15
is charged for a small sickle and Rs 20 for a large sickle. Rs 100 is charged if a domestic animal
is caught grazing inside the forest. The sickles caught are seized. The amount raised by realising
these fines and from plantation—each individual has to deposit 5 per cent of his income with
the VSS—was close to Rs 14,000 at the time of writing this case study. The salaries of the two
chowkidars and meeting expenses are met from this amount.

Impacts of the initiative

In the absence of any ecological research and based on conversations with villagers, chowkidars,
CHIRAG workers and personal observations, the following benefits of this effort were clear:
1. The workload of women has been reduced considerably, as there are fewer domestic animals to
look after and one does not have to walk a long distance to collect fuelwood and fodder;
2. The hills around the village, which once looked nearly barren, are now covered with green.
3. People have an additional source of income, thanks to the money given to them for raising
nurseries and labour income for plantation;
4. Increased agricultural output coupled with fruit production from the plantations. The villagers
are able to market fruits in the nearby fruit market at Bhowali.
5. Increased availability of water, confirmed by CHIRAG workers who put up hand pumps near
water sources.

Conclusion
The main reasons of the success of the project have been the cooperation of people and dedication
of CHIRAG workers. ‘Initially some people, such as a few contractors and hotel owners, were
against the project and we had a hard time convincing them, but a constant interaction with them
got their support as well,’ says Raj Mahra, Co-ordinator CHIRAG project at Naukuchia Tal. Women
also feared the non-availability of fodder. But later women gave their maximum support and they
fast understood the benefits of forest protection. People like Rewati Devi proved to be an inspiring
factor. However, even today, a handful of people, mostly from the neighbouring villages, remain
a stumbling block. Today, the 12 van panchayats spread over 3500 ha around Naukuchia Tal are
protecting their forests in one way or another despite strong pressure from the builders lobby, as
this area is among the hot destinations for people from Delhi to own farm houses.

Compiled from information sent by Rakesh

Agrawal, an independent researcher, in 2001.

For more details contact:

Rakesh Agrawal,
90-A, (M.I.G. Ist Phase), Indira Puram
P.O. Majra, Dehra Dun - 248 171

Thapaliya-Mehragaon and its protected forest

Photo: Neema Pathak
 CCA/UK/CS6/Paudi Garhwal/Dungri Chopra/Forest protection

Dungri Chopra village, Pauri Garhwal

Background
Dungri Chopra village is located in Yamkeshwar block of Pauri Garhwal district. The van panchayat1
(VP) in this village was formed in 1939 to manage a small patch of forest spread over 40 acres
(16 ha). The village consists of 36 households, including 30 thakur, four brahmin and two harijan
households.
Dwarika Devi, the sarpanch in 2000, had with her records of the VP functioning from 1939
onwards. Internal changes within Dungri Chopra’s Van Panchayat over its 60-year history provide
a microscopic view of the dynamics of changes in gender relations in this part of Uttarakhand.
Pauri Garhwal district has seen high rates of male out-migration in recent decades. Male literacy
rates are high due to which many men have been able to find well-paid jobs outside the state.
Average housing is of high (conventional) standards, dominated by cement and steel acquired
through the higher monetary earnings. Higher rates of deforestation are linked with poorer returns
from agriculture highly dependent on substantial organic inputs from forestlands. Literacy rates
even among women are higher relative to some of the other districts, and women from households
with good salaried jobs have been substantially relieved from the drudgery of gathering firewood
due to being able to switch to purchasing cooking gas. Such well-off households continue to
depend on firewood for heating during the cold winters.

Towards community conservation

According to elderly Dilip Singh of the village, who was instrumental in his youth in getting the
VP formed in 1939, the then village elders were dead against the formation of the VP. They feared
that VPs were a ploy of the colonial government to snatch their village forest, leaving them with
no area for grazing their cattle and collecting grass. Memories of the begar (free labour) system
were still fresh and the village elders feared its return. All the same, 4-5 younger men, including
Dilip Singh, got the VP formed and made Amar Singh, who was most resistant to the idea, the first
sarpanch.
The condition of their forest had become deplorable after the Grievances Committee opened
access to Class I forests to all bonafide residents of Kumaon.2 Only a few sal trees survived. The
VP’s first major problem was to re-assert customary village authority over its forest. All women,
men and children joined hands to build a protection wall. Neighbouring villages, which had started
using the forest during the years of open access, resisted its enclosure. The residents of Khobra
village even filed a case against Dungri Chopra, which was decided in the latter’s favour. The forest
was totally closed for 3 years and the villagers planted banj oak seedlings and pine seeds obtained
for them by the DFO from Nainital.
It took them three months to build the protection wall. After finishing their agricultural and other
work, all the villagers would assemble at the site. While women and children carried the stones,
the men did the masonry work. The DFO gave them a small amount for the entire effort. Amar
Singh, the sarpanch, called all the villagers, placed the money
in front of them, and then distributed it equally among every
man, woman and child. Dilip Singh, who remained the village
case studies - uttarakhand

pradhan for 30 years, said things were very different in those

days. There was complete unity in the village and all disputes
were resolved by the village nyay (justice) panchayat.3 There were
few government schemes and the villagers built the school and
the panchayat bhawan (community hall) themselves with little help
from the government.
This was the situation till a few decades ago. In the last couple of
decades, schemes worth lakhs of rupees have come to the villages and
there is rampant corruption. No government official visits the village
without negotiating a commission in advance. With most men having
migrated out for jobs, there is little male interest in managing the village
forest. Towards the end of the 1990s the village
749
750 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

women succeeded in getting an all woman van panchayat council elected. In 1999, the District
Rural Development Agency sanctioned Rs 60,000 for undertaking plantation in the village forest.
When Dwarka Devi, the woman sarpanch, went to collect the first instalment of Rs 30,000, the
Van Panchayat Inspector made her sign a receipt for the full amount but gave her only Rs 24,000.
She went to Dilip Singh to seek advice on what to do. He told her that in future, whenever any
such payment had to be collected, she should always take other women panches with her and on
returning to the village place the entire amount in front of the general house to prevent anyone
from suspecting her. The villagers would themselves help her work out how to deal with the
situation.
Dwarka Devi has internalized this valuable lesson in transparent governance. This has enabled
her to maintain collective responsibility for managing the village forest and evolve coping strategies
for dealing with the increasingly unsavoury and dramatically changed world outside the village.
The panchayat forest of this village is one of the best in the district and the women meet almost all
their forest needs from it. They even permitted every household to harvest one timber tree each
for their own needs a few years ago.

Conclusion
Rather than strengthening such transparent governance mechanisms within van panchayats, in
the year 2000 the government is promoting the ‘Village Forest Joint Management’ under the World
Bank-funded forestry project. This scheme has not understood the lesson in transparency that
Dwarka Devi has learnt from the history of the village. Instead the scheme assumes that misuse
of funds can be prevented by merely appointing the forest guard a joint account-holder with the
sarpanch. While perverting the tradition of the leadership’s accountability to the general body of
villagers, VJFM has created yet another avenue for lower-level FD staff forging alliances with male
village elite for misappropriation of funds coming to the village.

This case study has been adapted from: M. Sarin, Empowerment and Disempowerment of
Forest Women in Uttarakhand, India. Gender, Technology and Development 5:341-364, Sage
Publications New Delhi/Thousand Oaks/London, 2001.

For more information contact:

Ganga Gairola
CHIRAG (Central Himalayan Rural Action Group)
Nankuchiatal, Bhimtal – 263136
Nainital Dist.
Uttar Pradesh
Ph: 05946-47181

Endnotes
1
See state chapter on Uttarakhand for more details on van panchayats, which were formally elected village-level
institutions for the management of forests, established under the UP Van Panchayat Rules 1931.
2
In the 19th century the British nationalized the forests in Uttarakhand, ignoring people’s rights and management
systems over them. This led to widespread opposition in the region, including a threat of revolt from Uttarakhandis
in the British Army. The British then established a committee to look into the matter and as a recommendation from
the committee returned some forests back to the villagers. However, the land instead of being returned to those who
managed it traditionally, was opened up for one and all. See state chapter on Uttarakhand for more details.
3
A traditional institution to resolve village conflicts.
 CCA/UK/CS7/Pithoragarh/Lohathal/Forest protection

Lohathal sacred grove, Pithoragarh

Background
Lohathal sacred grove is situated in Thal block of Berinag tehsil in Pithoragarh District of
Uttarakhand. It is situated at a distance of three kilometres from Dharamgarh, with an unsurfaced
road connecting the two places. The nearest bus stand is Kanda Parav, at a similar distance. Kanda
can be reached by buses and jeeps from Bageshwar, Almora and Berinag. The altitude of the forest
varies from about 1500 to 2400 meters above sea level. The climate is largely temperate with
temperature hovering around 20-22 degrees during summer and plunging below the freezing point
during winter. It usually receives a good amount of snow and rains.
The population of Lohathal is 955, living in about 200 households. There are four toks (hamlets)
in the village. Mostly thakurs (kshatriyas or rajputs) live in three toks and one of the toks is a
Dalit hamlet. Agriculture is the main source of livelihood for people. With a close and organic
relation between the forests and farming in the hills, a healthy and dense forest is a must for
good agriculture. Some people, mainly dalits, are also artisans. There are five carpenter families
who are also dependent upon the forest to make agricultural tools. Hence, for livelihood (fodder,
fuelwood, manure and raw material) people are highly dependent on the village forest.
The entire Lohathal forest is spread over an area of 235 ha. At the lower altitude, about 80 ha
is mainly chir pine with a poor canopy cover. On the higher altitude about 155 ha is covered with
dense mixed forest. Oak and rhododendron are some predominating species with a noticeable
presence of mehar, utis, silver oak, deodar, surai and fir. Chir occupies only 5 per cent in the upper
tracts. These forests also harbour a good population of wildlife. Leopard, Himalayan black bear,
Indian wild boar, jackal, goral, kakar, Himalayan yellow throated marten (Chitrol) and monkeys are
some key animals; red-billed blue magpie, Asian koel, pine bunting, streak-throated woodpecker,
brown bullfinch and munia are some birds.

Towards community conservation

In 1994, a movement to offer the village forest to a local goddess, Kokilamata, considered to
be an incarnation of goddess Durga, was initiated in village Jakhani of Almora district. As market
forces and an ever-rising population had put an immense pressure on the van panchayat forests
in Uttarakhand, this was seen as the last option.1 Clearly, the local panchayats were not able to
protect these forests and, ‘everyone thought that the best way was to offer it to Bhagawati who is
our goddess of justice,’ says Kunwar Singh Karki, its chowkidar. In a ritualistic manner, everyone
from the village went to the local temple and after worshipping the goddess a written proposal was
submitted to her. In the proposal, the forest became a part of the temple for the next five years
and the boundaries of the forest were demarcated by putting flags along the boundary. Lohathal
Van Panchayat forests were offered to the goddess in 1993. In 1998, they were taken back from
the goddess again after a ritualistic worship including sacrificing a goat. ‘For five years, people can
somehow survive, and the forest is restored to its pristine condition, but after five years in the
long run it becomes difficult for the people. Also five years give enough time for the resources to
regenerate to the level where they can be sustainably managed. So we take it back from the devi,’
says Narayan Singh, sarpanch, Lohathal Van Panchayat.
case studies - uttarakhand

Once the forest has been offered to the goddess, the effective management of the forest goes
into the hands of the goddess. However, certain rules that were included in the proposal submitted
to the goddess are enforced by the voluntary will of the people and everyone sees that these rules
are observed. These rules include:
• No cutting of a green tree or a branch.
• No grazing in these forests.
• Only dry leaves can be collected along with twigs and
branches fallen on the forest floor.
• Dead trees can be taken.
For house-building purposes, wood is available from
the reserved forest (RF). For the period of five years a
751
752 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

chowkidar was appointed for these forests and people had to pay fines if they were caught violating
these rules. Under this, anyone caught cutting green leaves was fined Rs 50 and those pulling
down a small green tree were fined Rs 100. Once the forests were taken back from the goddess,
the old rules of the van panchayat become operational again.

Impacts of the initiative

In five years, the forests had regenerated well in what can be seen as a highly dense forest
cover, where sun rays find difficult to penetrate even in the mid-afternoon. ‘We no longer have to
walk a long distance to collect fuelwood and fodder,’ says Shanti Devi, 32, member mahila mangal
dal (MMD). ‘Our fields have started yielding grains and we are able to feed everyone in the family,’
says a beaming Pan Singh. The artisans initially found it difficult to get raw materials to make
agricultural implants. ‘We either stole from the neighbouring forests or bought the wood from the
market. Then we stopped making readymade tools and if someone had to get a tool made, he
would have to bring wood,’ says Dhani Ram, a carpenter. But now, it is not so difficult as banj trees
have become healthy again and people are allowed to trim them sustainably. This shows that the
following three positive results of the protection are visible:
• An increased amount of biomass—fuelwood, timber, grass and fodder—to people.
• Farm yield has gone up, because of higher availability of water as well as leaves for mulching.
• Increased forest cover. Although the species variety remains more or less the same, the protection
has resulted in a higher canopy density. It has also helped to increase the proportion of broad-
leaved tree cover as the protection has stopped a mindless exploitation of these trees.

Opportunities and constraints

In the year 2000, when the UP Government launched a massive drive to implement JFM in the
state, the exceptionally well-managed forest of Lohathal were one of the obvious choices for the
department. The forest officials were able to convince the village leaders to be part of the scheme.
An amount of Rs 7,96,000 was promised to make the forest even better during the next five years.
‘If we could run the programme well, it will be extended for another five years,’ says a hopeful
Singh. Under the programme, a nursery of about 35,000 plants has been set up and a stone
boundary wall is being erected. The executive community of the van panchayat has become the
JFM committee. The committee has 11 members including two women. It has no working relation
with the elected panchayat of the village. ‘We thought that people would get jobs as for nursery
and masonry work, people would get paid. Also, the salary of the chowkidar could be raised,’ says
Parvati Devi, a woman member.
Lohathal had adopted various local means to deal with the problem of forest degradation. An
external scheme of this kind, bringing with it the lure of large money has a great potential of
reducing the voluntary spirit of the village as also innovative local methods to deal with local
problems. The JFM scheme, as has happened in many areas before, will eventually run out of
funds. However by then the village would have been rendered powerless and spiritless to deal with
its own problems. It is for the department to consider whether the support for successful initiatives
like Lohathal should come in the form of an externally conceived and top-down scheme or as a
process where need assessment is carried out and support is extended where it is most needed.
There are nearly 25 sacred groves of this kind that exist in the area and they are protecting their
forest with a varied degree of success. The question is how they can be best supported and what
should be the process by which such support is extended.

Compiled from information sent by Rakesh Agrawal, an independent researcher, in 2001.

For more details contact:

Rakesh Agrawal,
90-A, (M.I.G. 1st Phase), Indira Puram
P.O. Majra, Dehra Dun-248 171

Endnotes
1
See the case study on Dharamghar region of Uttarakhand for more details and analysis on sanctification of van
panchayat forests in Uttarakhand.
 CCA/UK/CS8/Rudraprayag/Makku village/Forest conservation

Makku Van Panchayat, Rudraprayag

Background
The Akash Kamini Valley is situated in the northern hill region of Uttarakhand along the Western
Himalaya in India. Administratively and historically the area is called Garhwal and contains the
upper watershed of two of India’s major rivers, the Ganga and the Yamuna. This region also has
great religious significance as it houses the ancient Hindu temples at Badrinath and Kedarnath
and the Sikh Gurudwara at Hemkund. The Akash Kamini catchment lies in the Ukhimath block of
Rudraprayag district. The Akash Kamini catchment roughly covers an area of 73sq.km with altitudes
varying from 920 to 3,680 meters. 75 per cent of the land area in the valley is forested covering
approximately 55sq.km. About 30 per cent of these forests are managed under van panchayats.1
Apart from this area 1.2 per cent is under alpine pastures and 3.4 per cent is wasteland.2 The
economy of the Akash Kamini Valley is primarily subsistence-based agriculture, although agriculture
is not a source of cash for most families. Nearly every family in the valley (irrespective of caste)
has small land holdings, on an average 13 nalis (1 acre = 20 nalis). Agriculture is rainfed with no
irrigation, and traditional methods are still used for cultivation.
Five kinds of village institutions are prevalent in the region but all may not necessarily be
functional. In some cases a cluster of villages may have a common village institution. Table 1 gives
a summary description of these institutions.
Table 1: Village institutions: A description3

Institution Focus Main activities

restrictions on extraction of forest
resources
Forest management for a rotation system for harvesting forest
Van panchayat resources
local needs
hiring forest guards
imposing penalties
village cleanliness
Mahila mangal dal Women’s groups use of forest resources
maintenance of community buildings
organizing village melas (fairs)
Yuvak mangal dal Youth village cleanliness
organizing village sport’s activities

overall village village rules

administration overall village administration
Gram sabha
forest management forest management
(sometimes)
case studies - uttarakhand

maintain village infrastructure

village maintenance and
village cleanliness
upkeep
appointment of chowkidaar for the
Dekh rekh samiti forest management agricultural fields
(sometimes in the
absence of a van discussions on topics of interest to the
village
panchayat)
forest management (sometimes)
Members of the van panchayat (VP), gram sabhas (GS) and the dekh rekh samiti (DRS) are
elected and in majority of the cases are men. One male youth member from every household
can be represented in the Yuvak Mangal Dal ((YMD). Similarly one woman per household can
be represented in the mahila mangal dal (MMD). The lower castes are represented in all village
753
754 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

institutions, although they may not be very vocal (this varies from village to village). There are
some exceptions to this, e.g., the Makku Van Panchayat. Here village institutions have a large
representation of the scheduled castes, who are extremely vociferous.
Besides VPs, which are officially registered and recognized forest management committees,
MMDs and DRSs also play a very significant role in forest management in the valley. DRSs have
been responsible for managing forests in villages where van panchayats do not exist. The forest
land in these villages is civil/soyam4 and belongs to the gram sabha. MMDs in some villages have
now got access to forest land for management. Mahila bans in many villages are civil/soyam
forests that are now being managed by MMDs.

Towards community conservation

Makku village is located at the base of Tungnath Peak adjacent to Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary
(KWLS). Tungnath pilgrimage site and surrounding forests as also some portion of KWLS fall within
Makku area. The Makku village includes 2237.5 ha of forest within its boundary. Makku is the main
village and eight other neighbouring villages are part of the Makku Gram Sabha. Makku and these
eight villages are entitled to the use of these forests. However, there are 77 other villages that
have varying rights over these forests.

Management of forests by the van panchayat (VP)

The Makku Van Panchayat was registered in 1956 and subsequently recognized by the government
in 1958. Before the formation of the van panchayat a traditional and informal system was prevalent
for forest protection called the lath panchayat5. Makku is one of the two van panchayats in the
Ukhimath block that are called forest van panchayats. These VPs have been established on Reserve
Forest land which was delineated as such since 1952. The forest department exercises greater
control in the management of these VPs than the other VPs of the region. The forest department is
called upon for the evaluation of offences and has the right to make a decision in these cases.
The Makku VP administers the rights of all 85 villages in its forests and has diverse rules for
protection and management. The eight villages under the Makku Gram Sabha have limited rights
over the use of the forests for bamboo (ringal), grazing and fodder collection. The VP takes
decisions regarding execution of these rights. Bamboo extraction is restricted to a period of six
months, and the other 77 village members are permitted to harvest only after the eight right
holders. Grazing requires a permit and a tax of Rs 30 is charged for grazing one buffalo in the
forest. There is no rule laid down for the lopping of oak leaves. For extracting timber, the villagers
from the three villages of Makkumath, Kail and Jagpuda are charged Rs 50 per tree. These three
villages form part of the core management team for this VP. The remaining 5 villages from
Makku Gram Sabha are charged Rs 150 per tree and the 77 villages Rs 1000 per tree.
The eight villages that form part of the Makku Gram Sabha also adhere to other rules for
the use of the VP forests. Control on grazing is limited and part of the forest is closed for
grazing between May and November. Grazing in summer months takes place in the higher
reaches and livestock moves to lower areas during winters. If wood is required for making
agricultural implements then a group of people would have to apply to the VP. Use of wood
for agricultural implements is non-taxable, but the application has to be made by a group of
people, an individual cannot make it. If wood is required for building/construction purposes,
an application has to be made to the VP, with an assurance that the wood will not be used
for any other purpose. If the VP finds that the wood was used for any other purpose, all user
rights of the concerned person can be taken away.
The Makku Van Panchayat consists of nine members. Elections for a new sarpanch are held
every five years. On an average four VP meetings are conducted every year. Sometimes
they are even held once every month and sometimes once every three months. The annual
budget for Makku VP is Rs 25,000. The amount to be utilized has to be sanctioned by the
Sub-District Magistrate (SDM). Funds are derived through: i) Auction of forest products,
ii) Permits for grazing, iii) Royalty, iv) Tax on collection of fuelwood by outsiders, and
v) Fines. These funds have been utilized so far for plantation activities and repairing
of the boundary wall. The VP had also attempted to develop a medicinal plant nursery
which did not succeed. This land is now being used for cultivating fodder species. Two
villagers have been employed by the VP for protection of forests. All the villagers
contribute towards the guards’ salaries. In case an unrecorded offence comes to
the notice of the VP, then the salaries of the guards are slashed.
 Uttarakhand 755

Conversation with the ex-sarpanch revealed that despite all the policing, illegal timber harvesting
takes place from the forest. He mentioned the presence of a timber mafia, which operates in
connivance with some of the villagers. The panchs (members of van panchayat) and sarpanchs
visit the VP forests every two months. Officials from the forest department also tour the area on a
monthly basis and report to the SDM. Records are maintained by the VP and are supposed to be
examined by the Forest Panchayat Inspector (FPI) every year. The Makku VP is among the more
active and the second largest in this block. Villagers who are the members of this VP belong to
the higher castes, apart from being well educated. Interestingly even the lower castes in this VP
are fairly vocal. Every decision taken by this VP is subjected to considerable debate and discussion
where almost everyone participates.

Constraints faced by the VPs

The survival of VPs over such a long time is in itself a testimony of the validity of people’s
institutions. However, a question that remains to be explored is to what extent are they really
peoples’ institutions in terms of devolution of power? VPs have their own constraints that need
urgent attention to ensure long-term sustainability. Some of these constraints are mentioned
below:
1. The real empowerment: Most of the people feel that the VPs are only the caretakers of the
forests while all the power lies in the hands of the SDM. If the SDM is dynamic and focuses his
efforts towards VPs, then it would be beneficial to the VPs. The truth is that most often VPs
feature very low on the SDM’s list of priorities and are neglected. For example, the SDM of the
Ukhimath block, of which Makku is a part, had been posted to this block only 10 months prior
to writing this case study. He displayed a total lack of interest in VPs and confessed to not even
having read the VP Rules. This reflected very clearly in the functioning of the VP, which had not
had a meeting in a year when a field visit was made to the village in 2003.
2. Management of VP funds: Most people who were interviewed for writing this case study were
resentful of the SDM’s permission that is required to operate VP funds. The village elders
suggested creation of a separate account that the VP could operate independently. The Makku
VP sarpanch pointed out the danger of having the SDM as the final authority. He related an
incident when a particular District Magistrate (DM) in the past had wanted the VP money to be
transferred in another bank account to be used for another purpose that was not approved by
the VP.
3. Equitable distribution of funds: There was a lot of displeasure over the distribution of funds
derived from the VP. The sarpanch and elders of the Usada VP felt that the 40 per cent of the
revenue claimed by the FD is not justified, since FD makes very little contribution towards the
management of these forests. They also felt that the FD should rightfully divert at least a part
of the revenue back into these forests (which it does not do). The villagers feel very strongly
about this issue because even the money towards the salary of the VP guards is collected by
the villagers rather than coming from the VP account.
4. Corruption within the VP: VPs are also based on representative decision-making rather than
involvement of the entire village in the decision-making process. This leaves much scope for
mismanagement of funds in connivance with the government functionaries involved as well
as inadequate management of the forests. Smooth functioning of the VP as also its efficiency
depends on the individual sarpanch and his commitment and leadership. In Makku too the
management of the forests was much better under the leadership of ex-sarpanch Shri Maithani
case studies - uttarakhand

than it was at the time when this case study was written.
5. Pressure on surrounding government forests: It is acknowledged by most people in the region
that the quality of VP forests is much better than the ones under the reserved forests. The
ranger we met seemed to think that this quality is maintained at the cost of the reserved
forests. People protect their own forests and ravage the FD managed forests. The people on the
other hand feel that the reserved forests are just poorly managed in spite of adequate salaried
staff to do so.
In light of above problems faced by the VPs in this region, it seems evident that they will continue
to function in the same manner. The secretary to the SDM seemed to think that the existence of
most VPs is only on paper. Only two out of 103 VPs in Ukhimath block had substantial funding for
regular functioning. He felt that in order to activate the other VPs the funding mechanism has to
be changed. The Forest Panchayat Inspector, who is supposedly the link between the VP, revenue
756 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

department (RD) and the FD, has rarely visited the area although he is responsible for VPs in six
tehsils. The present system of financial incentives, in terms of salaries being paid and remuneration
for travel, etc., is not lucrative for the FPIs to spend time in the field.
To ensure that these institutions perpetuate and flourish is certainly a challenge. Most of the
people were receptive to the idea of a federation of VPs. This suggestion was brought up several
times by the people in the course of discussion. This could provide the appropriate platform for VPs
to air their grievances and find solutions to their individual and combined problems.

Forest management by mahila mangal dal (MMD)

MMDs are one of the five village institutions that are traditionally part of the village system and
are exclusively for women. The Makku MMD was established in 1987.
One woman member from every household is entitled to be a member of the MMD. The
representative is usually a senior woman member in the household, i.e., the mother/mother-in-
law. There are four office-bearers (all women): the chairperson, vice-chairperson, secretary and
treasurer. The vice-chairperson can officiate in the absence of the chairperson. The secretary takes
down the minutes of the meetings and keeps a log of all financial matters relating to the MMD.
Elections for office bearers are held once every five years. After the elections, the MMD has to
register itself with the Block Development Office (BDO). Members of the MMD meet every month.
MMD activities include: i) village maintenance and cleanliness, ii) Prohibition of alcohol, iii) Use of
forest resources, and iv) Employment for underprivileged women.
Each woman of the village individually saves Rs 2 to Rs 5 every month and contributes this
amount to the MMD fund, which is then deposited in a bank account. Registered MMDs are also
eligible for funding from the BDO. For example, under a Women and Child Development Scheme,
underprivileged women are trained and given employment by the BDO. These women are also
entitled to Rs 25,000 as a recurring fund. The utilization of funds is need-based and much of it is
spent on village social functions.
In the mid- 1980s the women of Kail village (which is part of the Makku Van Panchayat) expressed
their frustration over the excessive use of resources from the VP forests. The women in the region
are the major stakeholders in the forest land as they are responsible for collection of firewood,
fodder and grazing cattle. Although, women had access to the VP forest, they still found it a long
distance to commute, especially if they were leaving young children at home. The decision-making
and management of VPs is largely male-dominated. Realizing this, the rather progressive sarpanch
of the VP in the mid-1980s encouraged the women of Kail to start protecting a degraded patch
of forestland, adjacent to their agricultural fields. This was the degraded civil/soyam land which
belonged to the gram sabha. The sarpanch simply requested the women to form a system of
patrolling this land. Initially, this plan received opposition, specifically from the men who had to
put in some additional work at home while the women patrolled the protected forests. They even
accused the sarpanch of inciting the women.
Gradually, the patrolling by the women yielded results and women could get enough fuelwood
and fodder to meet their needs from this land, almost eliminating the use of resources from VP
forests, thus saving resources, time and energy. In 1987 the women formally registered their
MMD and have since been managing this land as their forest or mahila ban. The degraded land
has with protection now flourished and the once barren land has been replaced by forests. Women
continue to patrol the forests on a rotation basis every day. Sometimes the VP forest is still used
as and when timber is required for house construction. For effective management of the mahila
ban the women have divided themselves into smaller groups. A group of women manages a patch
of forest closest to their agricultural fields and over which they would have usufruct rights. Regular
meetings are held for the entire MMD, including all sub-groups, to discuss the rules, regulations
and other issues. Some of the rules are laid down. Some of these rules include, fines for illegal
felling (in an incident where a boy was caught illegally felling a rhododendron plant in the Kail
forest, members of the MMD decided to fine the parents), and a ban on grazing.
Since the establishment of the Kail Mahila Ban, three more mahila bans have come up in other
villages within Makku Gram Sabha. Women of each MMD make their own rules.

Effectiveness of MMDs
The emergence of MMDs to manage forest lands is a rather exciting development in the region.
The women are the major stakeholders in forests and this in itself is an incentive for them to
 Uttarakhand 757

undertake forest protection measures. MMDs provide a forum for them to express their opinion
unlike in VPs. Management of mahila bans by MMDs may prove to be more efficient since the
land in question is degraded civil/soyam land belonging to the gram sabha. MMDs are hence not
answerable to the SDM, providing them a free hand in functioning. Women also have a greater
incentive to manage forests in their vicinity and on a voluntary basis since they can balance the
household jobs at their convenience. There are no paid guards in these forest patches. However
the biggest shortcoming in areas where MMDs have come up is the fact that women are now not
only burdened with all the household responsibilities but also the added responsibility of forest
protection. This leaves them with little or no time to indulge in other social activities.

Ecological status of the forests

Although visibly the Makku VP forests look extremely dense, there is little biological data available
to indicate the exact quality of forests. The Biodiversity Conservation Network project coordinated
by WWF-India was supporting a silk production enterprise in the area for a few years. The BCN
team was carrying out regular monitoring exercises to determine the sustainable harvest rate of
oak leaves required for the silk enterprise. These studies revealed that there is very little second
storey in the forests. The team also found that the oak trees suffered more harm because the
method of extracting leaves for fodder was harmful. Several village meetings were organized in
order to discuss this issue and it was concluded that sapling mortality was mainly due to cattle
grazing by women. After a series of discussions the women, however, said that they just did not
have the time to ensure that cattle do not trample on saplings while grazing. Since then the project
has assigned tree guards around a lot of saplings in the area. This team also organizes regular
village meetings to illustrate a less harmful method of extracting leaves. The project has used a lot
of cultural methods such as songs to convey the message about protecting saplings in this area.
However, no detailed studies have been done on the impact of protection on the over all quality
of forests.

Opportunities and constraints

Imposition of Joint Forest Management
In 1998, as a result of the Uttar Pradesh Joint Forest Management (UPJFM) order, the Makku
VP was selected as one of the two in the district where JFM would be implemented. Officials from
the forest department held a meeting with the van panchayat members in mid 1998. The idea of
JFM in the Makku VP was however rejected by the villagers. They saw it as another effort by the
government to dilute their powers in the forests (see below for details).

Politics within the VP and role of the sarpanch

Very often the van panchayat functioning depends upon the sarpanch who is in power. When the
women were assigned control over degraded village land, the VP then had a progressive sarpanch.
However the subsequent leader has not been pro-active for the people to take positive initiatives
towards forest protection. An ineffective and corrupt leadership led to various conflicts among
the VP members along with non-maintenance of records of the meetings held. Subsequently, the
villagers have changed the sarpanch and VP functioning has consequently improved.

Lack of trust and faith in the forest department

case studies - uttarakhand

Although FD is appointed in charge of the forests and should be interacting with the people on the
issues of forest conservation and forest-based livelihoods, the people are extremely distrustful of
the FD and the other government departments. If given a choice between the FD and the Revenue
Department (RD), people prefer to communicate with the RD. The SDM has much more contact
with people on the ground as opposed to the DFO. The SDM is more accessible geographically too,
since he is stationed at Ukhimath while the DFO is in Gopeshwar, which is far away. The FD is
viewed as a ‘policing’ body with no attempts made to establish contacts with the people.
There is also a fear prevailing among people that the government’s intention is to eventually
take over VP forests. One reason for this is the presence of the Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary in the
vicinity. In response to a petition filed by WWF India, the Supreme Court in 1997 directed all state
governments to complete the process of rights and acquisition, as required under the Wild Life
(Protection) Act 1972, within a period of one year. As a result of this ruling the FD has been carrying
758 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

out a process of settlements of rights of the people living in and around legally protected areas
(PAs). Unfortunately, because of lack of communication, non-transparency and misunderstandings,
villages in this area do not have clarity about which of them fall within the sanctuary boundaries.
The villagers of Makku are convinced that part of the area under their gram sabha falls under the
sanctuary and hence access to the forest for the people living there will be curtailed. A visit to the
Range Forest Officer’s office revealed that Makku does not fall in the sanctuary at all. However,
neither the FD nor the RD has made any efforts to clarify this or to provide an explanation to the
people about the process of resettlement of rights. In the meanwhile, there is a growing degree of
distrust towards the FD in Makku.
The villagers have had negative interactions with the other government departments as well.
Makku VP had leased three nalis of their non-forest land to Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nigam (GMVN)
(a semi-autonomous body) for a guest-house in Chopta (a popular tourist spot at the base of
Tungnath). The GMVN encroached on another 150 nalis of the VP land. A case was filed in the
High Court which gave the ruling to shut down the guesthouse. This resulted in discontent among
Makku inhabitants since they were deprived of jobs. The land in question still lies unused. Land
has also been leased to the Garhwal University in Tungnath and also for establishment of a sheep
farm in the area but no progress towards these had been made till the time this case study was
written.

Refusal to accept Joint Forest Management

The above distrust was also one of the reasons why the villagers were not open to the idea
of accepting the government’s Joint Forest Management scheme. They feared that they would
lose control over their land if they were a part of the scheme. In addition, the villagers thought
establishment of another institution under JFM was unnecessary, as they felt that the VPs were
doing a good job. This decision was finally reached after nearly six months of deliberations in the
village.

Conclusion
This case study has brought up several interesting points that perhaps are important pointers for
new ventures in collaborative management.

Flexibility and adaptability

If the ultimate goal is to involve the local communities in natural resource management, it is
important to first locate the existence of any such forest management system. If a well-functioning
system already exists there are likely to be conflicts from imposing another system. The challenge
is to derive maximum output from the existing system by implementing effective changes.
Considering that the communities are so diverse, a uniform system that does not take into account
local specificities is unlikely to succeed. The van panchayats have been in existence for 70 years
and have been fairly successful in conserving forests. A programme like JFM needs to recognise
this and adapt itself such that it can plug in the gaps in the existing system and overcome the
constraints faced by that system to increase its efficiency. Also depending upon the need any
system needs to be able to adapt itself to meet the challenges. The process of establishment of
the mahila bans in Makku is a good example of that.

Transparency
There have been ill feelings and mistrust amongst the people of this area due to lack of or
inadequate information about the KWLS. This led to rumours and FD made no efforts reveal
the truth. The communities need to have adequate information about the actual situation before
arriving at any decision.

Gender sensitivity
It is quite evident that women are important stakeholders in protecting the forests of this region.
Hence gender sensitivity must be considered as a priority when designing any forest conservation
programme. As in the case of JFM, just by ensuring that a percentage of women are committee
members is not enough. The women of the region feel that men dominate these meetings with
women only attending as a token. In some cases where a woman has been elected the sarpanch of
 Uttarakhand 759

a certain VP, it is her husband who runs the VP indirectly. Thus it becomes necessary to recognise
women’s groups as separate entities and give them the due recognition with respect to forest
conservation, as was done in Makku.

Legal endorsement
Despite the fact that community initiatives for conservation are successful, they do face numerous
pressures from internal dynamics and politics and external commercial lobbies. It becomes important
then that these initiatives have adequate legal backing to thwart such pressures. However, it must
be kept in mind that for any kind of legal measures to be endorsed it must be well thought-out
and sensitive.

This case study has been written by Seema Bhatt, a member of Kalpavriksh. This information
is based on a CIFOR study on assessing devolution policies and their alternatives in the broader
context of local governance, pluralism and negotiation. This case study would not have been
possible without the help of the ex-sarpanch of Makku VP.

For more details contact:

Sarpanch
Makku Van Panchayat
Makku Math, The Akash Kamini Valley
Ukhimath Block
Rudraprayag District
Garhwal Division
Uttarakhand

Seema Bhatt
Independent Consultant
C-439, Defense Colony
New Delhi – 110024
Ph: 011-24330130/24339811
Mobile: 9810619983

Endnotes
1
Village-level institutions established to manage the forests in 1931. For more details, see state chapter on
Uttarakhand in this volume.
2
Appropriate Technology International, ‘Biodiversity Conservation through Small Producer’s Enhanced Commercial
Utilization of Natural Resources in the Garhwal Himalayas of India’, Implementation Grant Proposal (1995).
3
EDA Rural Systems. ‘Socio-economic Conditions and Village Institutions – A Baseline Survey of the Akash Kamini
Valley (1997).
4
Commercially less valuable forests under the jurisdiction of the civil administration (Revenue Department as opposed
case studies - uttarakhand

to Forest Department). For more details, see the state chapter on Uttarakhand in this volume.
5
A system under which all villagers participated in forest protection patrolling, taking turns. A wooden stick was
circulated from family to family, which would indicate whose turn it was to patrol the forest on a particular day.
 CCA/UK/CS9/ Tehri Garhwal/Holta/Forest protection

Holta village, Tehri Garhwal

Background
Uttarakhand state has a long tradition of community forest management. This is also one of
the first states where forest management by local villages was recognized in law. This was in
the form of the Uttar Pradesh Panchayati Forest Rules, 1931. The Rules required establishment
of democratically elected village van panchayats (forest councils) to manage the surrounding
forests. Tehri Garhwal, however, was exempt from these rules as it was an estate not under the
British jurisdiction. Holta, therefore, did not have any van panchayat. The village initiated its own
protection practices of communal land conservation (sanjaiti) around 1986.
Agriculture is the main source of income for the villagers and employment is also available in the
village as daily-wage workers in small shops along the road. The societal structure shows a visible
dominance of men in the village, but the village has a woman heading the gram sabha (local self
government institution).

Towards community conservation

According to the Holta villagers the water sources of the village had dried up and firewood and
fodder had become scarce, as a result of unregulated and excessive forest use by surrounding
villages and encroachments on the village land by local families. This compelled some village youth
to lead by example as they began giving up their own encroachments, thus convincing the other
encroachers to vacate the land. The village appointed an informal Forest Protection Committee
(FPC), which had elected representatives from all hamlets and castes. The committee formulated
a set of rules for grass, tree leaf fodder and firewood collection. These rules were strictly enforced.
Written communications in the form of letters were sent to the village heads of the surrounding
villages stating rules and penalties against anybody entering the protected forest area. All the
village households mutually contributed towards payment of a guard appointed to patrol the forest
area.
Initially the committee did not have any women representatives. However, within a short while the
committee realized that the women from their village as well as the neighbouring village continued
to steal firewood and grass from the forest. These failed efforts in preventing women from stealing
forest resources led the committee to induct four women as members of the committee.1
There was a major conflict that followed with one of the surrounding villages going to court against
Holta village on the issue of unclear boundaries of their respective common lands. However, this
conflict declined over a period of time as all villages noticed a marked improvement in the forest
condition and availability of water.

Impacts of community effort

By the year 1999-2000, when this case study was carried out, the biomass needs (except timber)
of the entire village were being met from the regenerated forest. Vegetable cultivation had also
case studies - uttarakhand

become feasible with the recharging of the three natural water resources in the village. According
to the women, all their grass, firewood and bamboo requirements were now being met from the
forest. Minor timber needs for the making of agricultural implements (such as sickles, ploughs,
and axes) were also being met from the forest. All the villagers were satisfied by the work of forest
protection carried out by the FPC.

Opportunities and constraints

The relationship between the forest department (FD) and the villagers is very sour. According
to the village women, the FD has made them out to be thieves; however, when they take positive
steps there is no help coming from the department. For example the FD does not provide any help
for controlling forest fires even though they have provision for this.
760
 Uttarakhand 761

Women and men have different perspectives on the gender-specific changes in the FPC. According
to the women, after gaining exposure and self-confidence through a government programme
called mahila samakhya program, they have had to put up a hard fight to survive in the protection
committee. As there are few men migrating out of the village, this has further narrowed down
the scope of leadership opportunities for the women. Apart from this, while men from all castes
participate in the decision-making, women from the so-called lower castes are further discriminated
against while constituting the FPC. The women are now insisting for reservation of seats in the
village forest protection committee as there is in the local panchayat.

This case study has been adapted from: M. Sarin, Empowerment and Disempowerment of
Forest Women in Uttarahand, India. Gender, Technology and Development 5:341-364, Sage
Publications, (New Delhi/Thousand Oaks/London, 2001).

For more information contact:

Madhu Sarin
48, Sector 4,
Chandigarh 160001
E-mail: msarin@sancharnet.in

Endnotes
1
Geeta Gairola, ‘Field case study of CFM in Holta Village, District Tehri Garhwal’, unpublished (1999).

case studies - uttarakhand

 CCA/UK/CS10/Tehri Garhwal/Jardhargaon/Forest protection and traditional agriculture

Jardhargaon, Tehri Garhwal

Background
Tucked away in a picturesque part of the
Himalayan foothills, the village of Jardhargaon
has a remarkable story to tell, a story of how a
community organised itself to conserve precious
forests, achieve equity in irrigation water
distribution, and revive agricultural traditions
which conserve and develop an amazing range of
crop diversity.
Jardhargaon is situated in the district of Tehri
Garhwal, Uttar Pradesh, at an altitude of 1500
meters. Access to this village involves a 3-km trek
from Upli Nagni, which is the nearest roadhead
on the Rishikesh-Tehri highway. Cutting across
boundaries of administrative blocks, local people Community protected forests of Jardhargaon
refer to this entire region as Hemvalghati, the Photo: Ashish Kothari
valley of the river Hemval, which originates from
the Surkhanda peak in the Garhwal Himalayas and merges with the Ganges at Shivpuri, about 16
km upstream of Rishikesh.
Jardhargaon is a typical hill village nestling in serene and picturesque surroundings. The higher
ridges of the village consist of dense reserved forest of baan oak, apricot and rhododendron
(burans) trees. The village has about 17 settlements/hamlets situated at quite a distance from
each other. Each settlement comprises approximately of 4-5 houses, with the exception of the
earliest settlement, quaintly referred to as Proper-gaon by the villagers. Cultivation is carried out
on terraced fields and in the valley, the latter primarily dedicated to paddy and wheat.
The population of the village was about 3000 as per the 1991 census, up from 1,137 in 1981.
The predominant communities are Rajputs and Harijans. As is usual in the ‘money-order’ economy
prevalent in the hills, male members of majority of the households are employed in jobs outside
the village. The women stay back and cultivate the fields and take care of the elders and children.
Given the small landholdings, there do not seem to be any major livelihood possibilities to keep
the youths back.
Agriculture and cattle-rearing occupy the foremost position in the economy, which is primarily
subsistence in nature with the forest being an important source of sustenance. The main resource
uses from the forest are collection of fodder, fuelwood, fruits, leaf litter, medicinal plants and wood
for weddings and house construction. Quarrying is also done for purposes of house construction,
but commercial sale is not allowed. Resin collection from pine trees was also done till a few years
back, but is not practiced any longer.

Towards community conservation

case studies - uttarakhand

Towards the end of the 1970s, the heavy dependence on fuelwood and fodder from the forest,
along with other factors, led to indiscriminate felling of trees by the villagers. The resulting erosion
of forest cover led to shortages of fuel and fodder, soil erosion and deterioration of soil fertility. It
was in this scenario, that the community initiative to protect the forests was taken in 1980.
The late 1970s and early 1980s were the peak periods of activism of the famous Chipko
movement, the famous Himalayan struggle to protect natural forests against contractors and other
forces of destruction. Jardhargaon, too, came under its influence, primarily through the active
involvement of one of its residents, Vijay Jardhari. In 1978, Vijayji and two other activists from
Hemvalghati, Dhoom Singh Negi and Kunwar Prasoon, had been instrumental in mobilising the
people of Badyargarh against commercial felling of trees in the surrounding forests.
On returning to Jardhargaon after working for the Chipko movement, Vijayji, along with like-

762
 Uttarakhand 763

minded individuals in the village, succeeded in mobilising the villagers to protect their forests.
The constitution of the Van suraksha samiti (VSS) was the first step in this direction. First and
foremost, the VSS imposed a total prohibition on cutting of green wood. It also started regulating
the distribution of dead wood to the needy for house construction and firewood, and the quantum
of wood sold to people for house-building and weddings. It now also ensures that minerals and
stones from the village are not sold commercially.
The VSS appoints Van Sewaks (chowkidars) to ensure compliance with the rules. Violators are
fined. The VSS comprises around 10 members, although the number is not fixed. There is normally
a woman member too. The members are chosen by common consensus in a meeting of the gram
sabha (village council), which comprises all the adult members of the village. The gram sabha
normally meets twice a year, after the rabi and kharif crop harvest. All the hamlets are by and
large represented in the VSS.
Another institution involved in forest protection is the mahila mangal dal (MMD; women’s
committee), which started functioning around 1987. The members are selected by consensus. The
MMD was very active in the beginning. It mobilised women to protest against limestone quarrying
in the vicinity of the village and also against sheep grazing by migratory graziers. The MMD
was also involved in plantation work in nurseries under the Government of India’s Greening the
Himalaya scheme in the 1980s. The MMD is not so active now on a regular basis, though in times
of crisis it gets activated, as when there was a recent threat of mining near the village.
A 30-year lease was granted to M/s Parvatiya Mineral Industry to extract limestone from 5.26 ha
of common lands right above Kataldi village, in the heart of Hemwalghati in Tehri Garhwal district
in Uttarakhand. Hemwalghati (Hemwal river and valley) was one of the centres of the pioneering
Chipko movement in the 1970s. Limestone mining was first undertaken around Kataldi during
1974-1979. Due to the strong opposition of the local communities the mining operations were
stopped. Subsequent attempts to mine have also been unsuccessful due to strong opposition of the
people of Hemwalghati, especially Kataldi and neighbouring villages. However, in the year 2001 the
mining company managed to procure a 30-year lease. People of the area, especially women, are
clear that they would not allow mining to take place and for this they launched a determined non-
violent movement, including a dharna through December 2001, not allowing any kind of mining
activity. However, the 30-year lease is a cause of great worry to the local people as it is likely to
affect their homes, their drinking water, their agricultural lands, fodder and fuelwood availability
and the biodiversity which they have struggled to conserve. Eventually, the villagers with support
from groups like Kalpavriksh managed to obtain a stay on mining activity in the region.
Another area of regulation and sustainable use in the village pertains to grass cutting. A section
of the civil/soyam forest (meant for village use) has been declared by the VSS as bandh van
(closed forest) and is used as grass-cutting area subject to certain regulations. This area is closed
from August to December to allow the grass to regenerate during the monsoons. When it opens in
November or December, one member from each family is allowed to cut one headload of grass per
day during specified hours only. The bulk of the grass that is cut during this season is stored for
the dry months. During the monsoons (July to October), there is enough grass in the vicinity of the
houses for the cattle to graze and women do not have to go deep into the forest for fodder.
These regulations are enforced by the pani panchayat (water
council), which functions under the supervision of the gram
pradhan (village head). The pani panchayat’s main functions are
regulation of supply of water from the river to the fields, equitable
distribution of irrigation water, warding off animals from the fields,
and regulation of grass cutting. There are 8-10 members who are
chosen by consensus. One of the members is chosen as the thekedar
case studies - uttarakhand

(supervisor) to oversee the entire team. The members are paid in

grain, and this payment depends on the size of landholding and the
nature of duties performed.
As if these initiatives were not enough, Jardhargaon is leading
the way in yet another field: the revival of agro-biodiversity.
Recognising that modern techniques of agriculture which the
government extension officers were bringing them are only yielding
short-term benefits, some of the village farmers have revived
traditional practices. Vijayji, for instance, is trying out 150 varieties
each of rice and beans, along with other traditional crops like
Activist of Beej Bachao Andolan millets, and then spreading back to other farmers those varieties
showing indigenous crop that are particularly useful. He and his other Chipko colleagues
diversity Photo: Ashish Kothari named above, along with young people like Raghu Jardhari and
764 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Saab Singh, have formed a Beej Bachao Andolan (Save the Seeds Movement). The Andolan has
actively pursued the revival of traditional farming methods, such as baranaja, in which about a
dozen crop species grown together yield a variety of produce which fulfils a variety of domestic
requirements while maintaining soil fertility.

Constraints and opportunities

To be able to take on struggles such as the ones against mining, the villagers face a severe
limitation of funds. The villagers do not accept foreign funds and are largely dependent on small
schemes and grants that come for their village or personal donations to undertake plantation
activities, travel, etc.
They are also making an effort to create a market for the indigenous and organically grown crop
varieties from their village. They have been successful in this to a certain extent and have been
tapping the markets in Delhi. However, regular marketing of products remains a problem because
of the remoteness of the village
Among other constraints faced by them are difficulty in communication due to the terrain, and,
above all, the burden of housework and agricultural operations, particularly on the women.

Impacts of the initiative

After almost 18 years of starting the VSS, the results are apparent. What was once a degraded
and in parts barren slope now has several hundred hectares of dense mixed forest. A diversity of
oak, burans, horse chestnut, pine and other species are present. In places, especially further away
from the village, the forest is as good as any found in a wildlife sanctuary.
Indeed, wildlife has obviously benefited from the protection work. Villagers report that wild boar,
deer species, tiger, leopard and Himalayan black bear have made their reappearance in the forests.
For avid conservationists, the presence of tiger (though undoubtedly not resident) is indeed very
encouraging. Visits to the forest by members of the environmental action group Kalpavriksh, which
has been involved with the village over several years, have also yielded a long list of bird species.
The resurgence of wild animal populations is indeed causing another problem, that of livestock and
crop damage, for which the villagers have yet to evolve a coherent strategy.

Conclusion
By no means is Jardhargaon a perfect success story. Cohesion in the village organisations is not
always present, and conflicts do break out. Hunting still takes place, though considerably less so
than earlier. Women remain essentially underprivileged, and some conservation-oriented decisions
may even cause them further hardships. Attempts to sustain the movement, including the Beej
Bachao Andolan, through local-level processing of biological resources and subsequent sale, have
run into problems of marketing and quality control. With a severe lack of funds, forest guards have
sometimes not been paid for long stretches. But these are not hidden issues: they are vibrantly
reflected in village-level democracy and conflict-resolution initiatives, and the more progressive
elements in the village are trying to tackle them.
One main problem confronting the VSS today is lack of effective enforcement, as there is no
way of ensuring that offenders comply with the imposition of fines on them. Perhaps the violations
are not serious enough to undermine the very process of community involvement itself. On the
other hand, what this raises is the urgent need to provide some formal authority to the VSS. So
far, whatever the village has achieved is through sheer people’s power, and there has been no
formal recognition by the government. Indeed, the forest department has not even entered the
forests for years now. Increasingly, however, it is being realised that with greater integration of
the village into larger systems of governance and the market, some legal authority may provide
the VSS the means for dealing with troublemakers from both within and outside. But if at all this
is opted for, it must be done with utmost caution. The initiative’s main strength has till now has
been the moral conviction of the people: that the forest is theirs, it provides them with fodder,
fuelwood, water and clean air, and therefore it is their responsibility to conserve it not only for
present but also future generations. It would be a tragedy if this sense of responsibility were to be
replaced by a sense of fear of reprisal, which is how the government attempts to conserve forests.
It would be an equal tragedy if the tolerance that people feel towards wildlife were to be replaced
by hostility, which is what has happened in many a national park and sanctuary of India because
conservationists have tried to protect wildlife from local people, rather than with them. Perhaps
 Uttarakhand 765
these, along with the importance of empowering village-level institutions, are the greatest lessons
we can learn from the remarkable villagers of Jardhargaon.

This case study has been written by Jaishree Suryanarayanan and Ashish Kothari, both members
of Kalpavriksh, in 1999 as part of a study on community-based conservation in South Asia. The
information was further updated by members of Kalpavriksh in 2006.

For more details contact:

Vijay Jardhari
Village Jardhargaon
P.O. Nagni
District Tehri Garhwal
Uttarakhand
Ph: 01376-275221, 09411777758

Ashish Kothari
Kalpavriksh
Apt. No. 5, 908 Deccan Gymkhana
Pune 411004
Maharashtra
Ph: 020-25654239/25675450
E-mail ashishkothari@vsnl.com

case studies - uttarakhand

 CCA/UK/CS11/Tehri Garhwal/Nagchaund/Forest protection

Nagchaund village, Tehri

Background
Nagchaund village is located 40 km away from Tehri dam in the Tehri District of Uttarakhand.

Towards community conservation

The forest adjoining this village was one of the most eroded and deforested forests in Tehri
District. Things changed in 1987, when a former army regular Soban Singh Bhandari retired
and returned to his village and was faced with fragmented forests, dried-up water sources and
unproductive terraced land. He noticed that due to the depleting resources, a large number of
able-bodied men would migrate to other places for work, leaving behind children, women and the
elderly.
In a short span of six months in the village he was elected as the village pradhan (village head).
Initially hesitant, he later accepted the post. He then used this opportunity to spread his ideas
of village reforms and called for a general meeting with the villagers. He proposed using the
Jawahar Rozgar Yogna1 more productively in the village instead of squandering these funds on
petty development projects. The village people responded by deciding to construct a community
centre. When this was completed, the cooperation received by the villagers propelled him to
engage in more developmental works for the village.
In 1990, when the FD was surveying the area for implementing the micro-watershed scheme,
they came upon Nagchaund village. After several discussions with the pradhan, a 30-hectare
barren community land was selected for the project. To keep uncontrolled grazing in check, the
village people erected a wall around the site with funds from the watershed programme. After
the monsoons, the villagers undertook a tree plantation drive to meet their fuelwood and fodder
requirements.

Impacts of community effort

In just a few years the greenery in the area was restored and the villagers had enough fuel
and fodder to meet their consumption needs. Despite the small size of their forest, the ecological
effects were amazing. The moisture content of the area increased and the water resources of the
village were recharged.

Opportunities and constraints

After the watershed programme was withdrawn, the villagers were faced with the problem of how
to maintain the protected land and wall. Since they had no surplus funds, the pradhan suggested
selling the fodder collected from the protected land and using the money for maintenance of
the area. Initially the villagers were opposed to the idea, but when he sold the fodder to the
case studies - uttarakhand

neighbouring village and collected Rs 3,600 for it, the villagers agreed and used the money for
developmental work.
Next, under the leadership of the pradhan, the community took up plantations and soon the
entire wasteland of the village had turned green. When the trees grew, the village was faced
with the problem of protecting them. Bhandari assigned the village
people the task of protecting specific pieces of land, trees and new
plantations. Besides this, the villagers also had to deposit a stated
amount as compensation for fodder, which was used to fund community
projects.
Subsequently, check dams were constructed on the dry streams
and deep V-shaped slopes in the wastelands to harvest maximum
amount of water. Once the ponds were full, they were covered with
766
 Uttarakhand 767

polythene sheets so that the villagers could have enough water to last through the summer while
maintaining the humidity of the soil.

Conclusion
Efforts like this clearly emphasise the value of an efficient and committed leadership in order
to initiate positive social action. This initiative may not be towards wildlife protection directly but
indicates how local needs can be met with by people if they have security of tenure and right
guidance. Once such needs are met by the people in a manner that is most acceptable by them,
pressures are diverted from other areas, where biodiversity conservation can then be planned.
Such efforts may be more successful than imposing external and alien programmes.

This case study has been adapted from J.P. Panwar in Down to Earth, 4 July 2007.

Endnotes
1
A central government scheme towards employment guarantee in rural India, where daily wage employment is
assured in a village where the scheme is being implemented.

case studies - uttarakhand

 CCA/UK/CS12/Uttarkashi/Dakhyatgaon/Forest protection

Dakhyatgaon, Uttarkashi
Background
Dakhyatgaon is located in the Jumna valley in Uttarkashi district of Garhwal region of Uttarakhand.
The village can be approached on a motor road from the nearest town of Barkot. The village is
conserving an approximate area of 3sq.km (300 hectares) of forest. This particular patch of forest
is called Banali or Banai, meaning place or habitat of baan oak forest.
The village forest is located on and around a hilltop near the village. It is a sloping land at an
altitude range of 1800–1900 m, with a mean annual rainfall of 110 cm, a lowest winter temp of
0°C, and a highest summer temp of 30°C. The climate is monsoon sub-tropical to temperate. There
are eight natural water sources present in the vicinity of the village, whose catchment is protected
and maintained by this forest.
The ecosystem type is Montane – Himalayan Oak – Rhododendron forest, grassland, cultivated
land, and habitation of four villages within 10 km of the forest patch. The flora is dominated by
baan oak and rhododendron. Other associated tree species are ainyaar, lodhra, kaula/kawala,
shurur, kaint/mohal, phaja, bhambela, pangoi/paranga, bashroi/bhainshra, kimu and dudhoi. Chir
is also present, as this altitude is the upper limit of this species. Bhiyul and kharki are cultivated
on terrace edges for fodder and other uses.
There is human habitation and cultivated land nearby. Therefore wildlife is generally scarce.
Hunting is reported to be fairly common in the region, particularly of various species of deer.

Table 1: Demographic data and economic status

Community Main sources of income

Jayara (rajput) Agriculture, animal husbandry, service, wage labour
Mistri (dalit) Masonry and carpentry, building construction
Tailoring and stitching, playing traditional drums at
Bajgi (dalit)
festivals, weddings, spiritual ceremonies and rituals
Harijan (dalit) Wage labour, agriculture

The village has about 600 people and a livestock population of about 2000
People are completely dependent on the conserved area for livelihood needs, including:
• For agriculture, for which leaf litter is required to produce air-dried compost,
• For animal husbandry—to provide manure for agriculture, milk, ghee, meat, wool, and cash
income, for which both tree leaf fodder in the autumn, winter and summer, fresh green grass in
the monsoon, and dried grass hay after the monsoon are required;
• Firewood is required for cooking all year round, and heating during the winter,
case studies - uttarakhand

• Fibre is required for producing rope, fishing lines, etc.

• For medicines for common ailments,
• For wild edibles to help supplement nutrition and food security, especially for women who are
generally nutritionally deficient
• For maintaining water sources and ensuring sustainable water supply
Additionally, the nomadic Van Gujjar tribe, originally from Jammu, and now settled in the Shivalik
hill area around Dehradun and Haridwar migrate through this area seasonally with their buffaloes.
On their way through to the bugyaals (alpine grasslands) at the head of the Jumna valley, they
camp temporarily and use the surrounding forests for grazing. The local perception is that nomadic
people’s livestock and grazing, if maintained within certain limits, benefits the forest and grazing
land by providing manure and keeping down weeds, and therefore helps maintain biodiversity.
768
 Uttarakhand 769

Legally these forests are Reserved Forests declared in 1911. Since then officially there are no
rights for local villagers in these forests as per the working plan for Jumna Forest Division. Only
concessions are granted. These concessions include limited grazing, dead wood collection and
extremely limited free grant timber. It is obvious that people’s livelihood requirements are far
more than what is officially allowed. Having understood this reality, the local forest officials have
not been very strict if additional timber is occasionally required by the villagers.

Towards community conservation

The main objective of the community initiative was to re-establish an earlier existing system of
sustainable resource use to yield fodder, firewood, catchment protection, medicines, wild edibles,
fibres, etc. This traditional system had been disturbed and dismantled by the reservation of village
forests by the forest department of Tehri Riyasat under the maharaja. The nearby forest that
the villagers depended on for their livelihoods had become severely degraded from commercial
exploitation and the resentment of local people who then began to use it excessively, believing
that if they protected it, then the state would take it away from them.
The initiative towards conservation was started about 50 years ago. Reservation and curtailment
of customary rights had caused alienation of local communities from the forests. By this time, a
very large area of forest that included this particular patch had become extremely degraded. Many
water sources had dried up; and firewood, leaf fodder, leaf litter and other forest produce was
becoming scarce; and women’s drudgery had increased substantially.
The entire village, after facing tremendous hardship in meeting their basic needs, sat together and
took a unanimous decision to start protecting this patch of forest for their basic needs. The decision
was supported by all sections of society in the village, including the disprevileged groups.
The village instituted a van suraksha samiti and a mahila mangal dal (MMD) for management of
these forests. The MMD was originally formed on the request of the Assistant Development Officer
(ADO) of the local panchayat. This was essentially to meet a target assigned to the BDO for setting
up these bodies in the villages. The MMD was promised a dari (rug), a dhol (drums), a matching
contribution to what they could save, and training programmes for women for income-generation
schemes. (After the dari and the dhol, nothing further materialised.) The adhyaksha (president)
of the MMD was elected democratically by about 50 per cent of the women in the village who had
chosen to become members and started saving. Her term has been fixed at 3 years, after which
another woman will be elected in her place.
The VSS has all male family members above school-going age as members. A karyakarani samiti
(executive committee) of 5 members was democratically elected and is responsible for the day-
to-day functioning of the samiti. The term of the committee is also 3 years. Seasonally, a routine
meeting of all the families is called to take decisions about harvesting, rotation, etc. For resolution
of conflicts, traditional systems are resorted to even today, which mainly include a council of elders.
The management of the forests is based on the principles of equal access to natural resources for
every family.
The village maintains a self-imposed ban on firewood and fodder collection from the area under
their protection. This forest area is only opened every year for leaf fodder lopping and firewood
collection for a definite short period as described earlier. This is strictly monitored by a committee
appointed by the village. Every family gets an equal share of the resource, by the method of only
allowing one person per family to participate in collection.
There are some important local rules to conserve the forest and ensure its sustainable use:
case studies - uttarakhand

• Lopping for leaves and branches for fodder and firewood from a selected patch is allowed only
every 5 years.
• Removal of leaf litter from the forest floor for manure purposes in a selected patch is allowed only
every 2 years.
• Blanket ban on green felling of trees without following forest department procedures.
• Use of all forest produce is only allowed at a specified time, for a short period, e.g., 1 week,
decided at an open meeting well ahead. Every family is allowed to send one representative to
ensure fair and equitable distribution of produce.
• Specified areas are kept aside for grazing. Other areas are designated for grass cutting after the
monsoon, where grazing is not allowed.
• Limited quarrying of flat roofing slates called pataal, and local stone for house construction.
770 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Impacts of the initiative

No scientific studies exist to prove exactly how the initiative has benefited the ecology of these
areas. However, the forests have regenerated over a period of time and supply of forest produce
has increased. This has benefited the people in many ways. The women do not need to walk long
distances for collection of firewood, water and other forest produce anymore. Water availability
has increased in the village. There appears to be a return of some plants and animals that had
become scarce when the area had become degraded. These include associates of oak like ainyaar,
lodhra, buraans, etc., and animals such as kakar, serow, and various bird species.

Opportunities and constraints

Uttarakhand became a new state in 1999. There was a great hope that the new state would
draft new policies for the benefit of the people. People had also hoped that the new government
would be more understanding and sympathetic towards people’s dependence on forests in this
region as also the traditional systems of conservation, and also that there would be a greater
trust in local people and government would hand over forests for management to the people. This
expectation had, however, not been fulfilled till the time this paper was written. The Government
of Uttarakhand could have learnt a lesson or two from the successes of neighbouring Nepal, where
the government has handed over forests for management and use to village communities under
their community forestry programmes and have had successful results in forest regeneration.1
Local people speak of the existence of a bond between themselves (human society) and the
forest. However, they feel that the 100-year-old conflict between the traditional subsistence use
of the forests by local villagers and scientific commercial forestry has taken a heavy toll in terms
of turning people against the forests, and resorting at times to destructive and irresponsible
practices. Such practices are further fuelled because of the corruption in the official machinery. For
example, in the hills above 1000 msl, the government banned green felling in 1981. Instead, the
Forest Development Corporation (FDC) was handed over the responsibility of removing dead and
decaying trees. The FDC now floats tenders for this task rather than handing it over to the villages.
Villages have seen over a period of time that contractors have misused the situation by felling many
green trees under the garb of collecting dead wood. Such practices are clandestinely supported
by the government machinery. This has brought about a disillusionment among the villagers.
The contracts being handed over to the outsiders has also severely restricted the possibilities of
generating local ecosystem-based incomes and livelihood sources.
Villages like Dakhyat present a strong case for a larger area to be officially handed over to the
villages to manage, conserve and use by restoring full customary rights and responsibilities over
forest produce.
Villagers also feel that the schemes and programmes for development and protection of forests
exist only on paper. The forest department seems to use them exclusively to make money from
public development funds. Non-literate villagers say, ‘We plant 5 trees for our basic survival needs.
All of them survive and grow. The government plants thousands every year. But where are they?
None seem to survive. Why? Because the forest department and the contractors and labourers
they hire are only interested in the money, not the trees. They have no feeling for the forest. Why
can’t they hire local people?’
The legal framework governing Reserved Forests does not contain any rights for any local
communities, only concessions originally granted by the earlier Maharaja of Tehri Riyasat after he
had the forests reserved in accordance with British forest policy. The original settlements setting
out timber requirements per family are ridiculously outdated and now reportedly legally provide
roughly 1 tree per family every 5 years or so. This is simply not enough. So to meet their needs,
villagers are forced to bribe the forest guard or forester to look the other way while they fell a
tree to meet their legitimate needs. In 1995, a Supreme Court ruling curtailed even bonafide ‘free
grant’ timber rights indefinitely, and this right has only been restored in 2000.

Conclusion and the way ahead

The village needs to be equipped with the tools to plan ahead for their future. They need to
be trained in techniques to survey and estimate the extent of their available biomass resources,
estimate their total and per capita demand, and project both into the future. This can form the
basis of a plan to create and develop the resources required to provide sustainable livelihoods
for the village. This will envisage re-establishing customary/traditional rights over a larger area
including patches of reserved forest, and closing off part of the area for afforestation and to assist
 Uttarakhand 771

natural regeneration. Establishing a van panchayat would be a big help. The basic requirement
for leaf fodder has been worked out by Shri Sundarlal Bahuguna. He says an average family that
keeps a milch buffalo, a pair of bullocks and a few goats or sheep requires a minimum of 300
mature fodder trees. One tree should be lopped per day, while the remaining 65 days during the
monsoon, green grass can be collected from agricultural lands and supplemented with weeds and
crop residues.

Contributed by Darab J. Nagarwalla, Prakriti, Mussoorie, in 2001.

For more details contact:

Asha Ram Bijalwan
C/o Tourist Rest House (TRH)
Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nigam
Barkot, Dist. Uttarkashi, Uttarakhand
Phone: 013754-4236

Darab Nagarwala
PRAKRITI, Society for Promotion of Sustainable Livelihoods from Nature
Oakville, Landour, Mussoorie-248179

Endnotes
1
For more details see www.icimod.org.

case studies - uttarakhand

 CCA/UK/Other villages

Other villages, Uttarakhand

1. Gwaldam village, Chamoli
In Uttarakhand, maiti means the parental home of the bride. The maiti movement started in the
small town of Gwaldam and is now spreading fast throughout the state. The maiti ceremony fosters
planting of trees at weddings as a part of the nuptial ceremony. During the ritual, the bride hands
over a sapling to the groom, who plants it while the girl waters it in the presence of a priest, amidst
chanting of shlokas and mantras. The parents and friends of the girl look after the plant when the
girl leaves for the groom’s house.
This ritual is the brainchild of Kalyan Singh Rawat, a zoology teacher in the government school in
Gwaldam who was involved in the movement. He started this system in 1996, after observing his
girl students’ interest in nature while on a trip to bedini bugyal (alpine meadows). According to Mr.
Rawat, deforestation in recent times has severely affected womenfolk, as they have to walk miles
in search of grass, wood and drinking water.
A maiti group consists of unmarried girls, the eldest of whom is known as maiti didi (elder sister).
This group prepares a maiti nursery in a village or town. On the day of the wedding, a sapling
is brought to the groom, which is planted by him. The groom has to contribute some money
towards the maiti volunteers. The money collected from such contributions is used for elevating the
economically backward girls. Needy ones are provided financial aid to meet educational expenses.
Maiti organisations also extend monetary support to destitute families who want to find a groom
for their girls. The word ‘maiti’ has blended emotions with the strong desire for eco-conservation.
After the Kargil war, the women in the remote Ochati village developed a sprawling maiti forest
dedicated to the soldiers. Recently some 300 trees were planted in the villages of Bageshwar
district. In a bid to propagate the message of maiti, students from different universities have taken
up tree plantations. With the assistance of maiti activists, farmers in Uttarakhand are planting fruit
trees and also trees that provide firewood and fodder.

For more details contact:

Village and P.O. Gwaldam
Chamoli District
Uttarakhand 246441

2. Khirakot village, Almora1

In the early 1980s a contractor form Kanpur obtained a lease for mining sandstone from the hills
around Khirakot village. As the work progressed, the villagers and women in particular realized
that something was terribly wrong. The mine debris was destroying their carefully preserved patch
of forest. The narrow bridle paths to their reserve forests were overrun by mules ferrying the stone
and villagers would have to wait for a long time for the procession of mules to pass before they
could cross. During the monsoon, the dust from the mines swept down into the fields, creating a
case studies - uttarakhand

thick crust that made ploughing difficult.

The men stopped working in the mines and built walls to prevent the mules from using the paths.
A criminal case was filed by the contractor against the actions of the villagers. This did not deter
the women of the village, who went to each household to collect money to fight in court. Direct
action also started by physically stopping the working of the mines. This was followed by retaliation
by the contractor: throwing stones at the houses in the village, burning down of a cloth shop, and
loosening a reign of terror in the village. When nothing worked, the women were even offered the
bait of ownership of the mines, which they refused.
The District Magistrate was shown the destruction caused by the mines to the area and he
ordered the cancellation of the mining lease. In 1992, the mines were officially closed.
The women of Khirakot now settled down to regenerate the forests and fields destroyed by the
772
 Uttarakhand 773

mines. They filled the ditches created by mining, built a protective wall to prevent the debris from
destroying the fields, and planted oak in the panchayat forests.

3. Haryali Devi sacred grove, Uttarakhand2

Haryali Devi is a densely forested area in Chamoli District of the Garhwal Himalaya. The temple of
the goddess Haryali Devi stands about 10,000 feet above sea level, surrounded by a thick forest of
banj oak, burans, kharsu, moru, kafal and dozens of other local shrubs and bushes. Pilgrims have
to remove their shoes 200 m away from the temple and are required to visit it wearing clothes of
sober hue as very bright coloured clothes are prohibited. One has to maintain total silence whilst
visiting the forest. Bright clothes, whistles or shouts have been known to frighten the wild animals
that reside in the thick sacred grove.
Fetching fodder or fuelwood from the forest is disallowed. People firmly believe that if someone
hurts the trees, whistles or shouts the forest fairies (acharies) will be angered. All these traditions
and myths were born out of local indigenous wisdom to conserve biodiversity. For instance, the
doli (palanquin) of the deity Chalda Mahasu is accompanied by high-bred rams which are fed
and protected by the villagers, probably for improving their breed. In some sacred places, killing
of deer seen in a pair is a sin. Worshipping water sources, small canal (gule) and trees is fairly
common in the mountains.

4. Sachidanand Bharti’s efforts, Ufrain Khal, Pauri3

Sachidanand Bharti has transformed large parts of the once-denuded Dudhatoli range in
Uttarakhand’s Pauri district into some of the best and thickest forests in the state.
Since the 1960s, unrestricted industrialisation has made large tracts of the mountains mere
warehouses for natural resources exported to the plains. In the 1970s, grassroots protest against
the destruction of the forests famously found its most visible expression in the Chipko (literally
means hugging the trees) struggle, which began in Gopeshwar in Chamoli district. Bharti was then
in college in Gopeshwar and was an active participant in the movement, even forming a college
group called Daliyon Ka Dagda (Friends of the Trees) to spread the word on conservation. After
his studies, when he returned to Ufrain Khal, he found the same sorry tale of destruction there as
well. ‘Around that time, the forest department decided to cut down a stretch of silver firs near Dera
village. Coming from the Chipko movement, I knew how to tackle this and I started a campaign
and mobilised the villagers,’ says Bharti. Thanks to his efforts, hundreds of firs were saved from
the official axe—a small success which laid the foundation for big changes and, most importantly,
helped give the people of the area a sense of their rights and the importance of unity.
Old-timers in the mountains speak of how the forests were once sufficient to provide both for the
wild animals that lived in them as well as for the villages dependent on them for fuel and food. But,
as deforestation spread out of control, not only did the villagers have to deal with severe resource
scarcities but the animals of the forests became a menace, driven by the vanishing tree cover
toward human habitation. Instead of killing the animals off, as happened elsewhere, at Bharti’s
suggestion villagers in Dera began building walls around their fields and settlements. The wall that
was begun in 1980, with money pooled in by villagers not only from Dera but from other villages
too, is 9 km long today, and the project has been replicated elsewhere as well. Around this time,
Bharti also took up teaching at a local school. His long-time friend and doctor, Dinesh, says this
was the single most important reason for the success his projects later had, as he was able to
reach out directly to the young with his conservationist message.
case studies - uttarakhand

By the late 1970s, the deforestation problem had sufficiently alarmed the government to spur
it to official action—it began planting pine trees in empty patches in reserved forests. This, Bharti
says, was disastrous. ‘Pine forests reduce moisture levels, and that, together with the trees’ highly
resinous content, leads to forest fires. Besides, they don’t grip the soil well and are poor protection
against landslides,’ he explains. In 1980, Bharti tried a different approach. With the help of the
forest department, he established a nursery of indigenous mountain species: oak, fir, cedar and
alder. This effort later grew into the Dudhatoli Lok Vikas Sansthan (DLVS), which undertakes
indigenous tree plantation across the range and holds annual environmental awareness camps in
the 150 villages that are part of it. From the beginning, the DLVS has also been a tremendous tool
for women’s empowerment. Women in Uttarakhand are invariably left to manage home and field,
as the men migrate for work to the plains. It is the women who bear the brunt of the resource
scarcity around them. To encourage their participation, Bharti formed mahila mangal dals (MMD)
in every village he worked with, and entrusted them with taking up their own part in securing their
774 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

future. After the first plantation drive, the villagers who took part made a collective decision to
enforce a 10-year ban on forest activity. Through the MMDs, it was the women who took on the
task of posting a lookout for trespassers, with patrols working in shifts to keep the vigil.
Within a decade, the people of Dudhatoli regained a large part of their lost forest cover. Bharti
says with pride that the villagers have not spent more than Rs 6-7 lakh on planting entire forests
over 27 years. After initial help with the first nursery, the DLVS has never asked for any assistance
from the government. Instead, it funds itself through a corpus created from the sale of saplings
grown in its nurseries. Bharti is in fact critical of the government’s role in conservation in the
hills. ‘Reserving forests meant that mountain people were severely restricted from accessing their
woods,’ he says, ‘But, when money changed hands, the very same rules were flouted openly by
the forest officials in cahoots with greedy contractors.’
In 1987, the entire range went through a severe drought. Worried, the DLVS decided to dig a
small pit near every tree, so water could collect and allow them to survive a few months longer.
At this time, Bharti came into contact with Anupam Mishra of the Gandhi Peace Foundation, who
provided him with know-how on the making and maintenance of small-scale water bodies. Bharti
turned the principles to meet local requirements and, with the DLVS, began to resuscitate old,
dried-up water bodies and create several new ones. Twelve thousand such ponds, big and small,
now bring water to about 40 villages. Satish Chandra Nautiyal of Simkoli village points to a small
well by his house that Bharti helped build in 2005; this well, he says, is now the basis of the entire
village’s existence.

Endnotes
1
Source: Anon. ‘Woman Power’ in Humanscape, extracted from State of India’s Environment 1984-1985: The
Second Citizens Report (New Delhi, Centre for Science and Environment).
2
Source: J.P. Panwar, ‘Here we come, ecochums’, Down to Earth, 31 May 1996.
3
Source: E-mail to defendingwildindia@yahoogroups.com sent on Saturday, 20 January 2007, based on a report by
Sanjay Dubey on Tehelka.com
West Bengal
West Bengal - an introduction
Location and biogeography
Situated between 21°38’ and 27°19’N latitudes and 85°50’ and 89°50’ E longitudes, West Bengal
stretches from the Himalayas in the north to the Bay of Bengal in the south. West Bengal is
bounded by five Indian states and three countries: Sikkim to the north, Bhutan to the north-east,
Assam and Bangladesh to the east, Nepal, Bihar and Jharkhand to the west and Jharkhand and
Orissa to the south-west. The total geographic area of the state is 88752 sq km. West Bengal has
a 650 km-long coastline.
Due to altitudinal variations, the state experiences temperature ranging from below freezing
point in the hills during winter to about 45°C in the southern plains during the summer. The
climate varies from moist-tropical in the south-east to dry-tropical in the south-west, and from
sub-tropical to temperate in the mountains of the north. At the higher altitudes (above 1800 m) of
Darjeeling district, severe frost formation and snowfall occur in winter.
Annual rainfall of the state in the northern mountains and the sub-montane region is 2000-6000
mm, in the south-western region it is 900-1400 mm and in the coastal region it is 1700 mm.
Around 11880 sq. km (13.4 per cent) of the total geographical area is under forest cover. The
major rivers systems in the state are Ganga, Bramhaputra and their tributaries.
There are four biogeographical zones in the state: (i) Central Himalayas, (ii) Chhotanagpur plains
of the Deccan peninsula, (iii) Lower Gangetic plains, and (iv) the eastern coast.
In West Bengal, there are about 54 natural and nine human-made major
wetlands, totally covering an area of about 3,44,527 ha. The predominant
wetland types of the state are marshes, jheels, Terai swamps and char lands
(waterlogged land formed after floods) of the Gangetic plains, wetlands in
the islands of the Bay of Bengal and coastal brackishwater wetlands. The
largest stretch of mangroves in the country lies in the Sunderbans of
West Bengal, covering an area of about 4264 sq. km (i.e., 36 per cent of
recorded state forest land).
The total forest cover is 12343 sq km, i.e., 13.91 per cent of the total
geographical area as per the Forest Survey of India 2003. The 10 forest
types in West Bengal are Northern Tropical Wet Evergreen, Northern
Subtropical Semi-Evergreen, North Indian Moist Deciduous, Mangroves,
Tropical Seasonal Swamps, Northern Tropical Dry Deciduous, Northern
Subtropical Broad-leaved Wet Hill, Northern Montane Wet Temperate,
East Himalayan Moist Temperate and Sub-Alpine Forests.

Biodiversity
The flora of West Bengal comprises 3580 species. A total of 8037 animal species have been
recorded here. Zoological Survey of India (ZSI) has listed 176 mammals’ species and 497 species
avian fauna in the state. West Bengal is known to have the richest species diversity of fish in India,
with a total of 574 species.
state chapter - west bengal

Socio-economic profile
West Bengal is the third most populated state of the country with population of 80,176,197. The
official language is Bengali.
Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) comprise 23.62 per cent and 5.59 per cent of
the population respectively. Nearly 72 per cent of the population resides in rural areas, in 43,000
villages. West Bengal has at least 38 major categories of tribal people. A majority of these tribes,
such as Santhal, Oraon, Munda, Kora, Mehali, Lodha and Malpaharia, have migrated from Santhal
Parganas during the 19th century and settled mainly in Medinipur, Puruliya, Bankura and West
Dinajpur; while a few others, viz., Bhutia, Lepcha, Mech and, Rava are residents of the hill section
of Darjeeling and Jalpaiguri.
777
778 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

Wetlands of east Kolkata form an important ecosystem in West Bengal

Photo: Ashish Kothari

The main occupation is agriculture, accounting for 95 per cent of the rural population, followed by
industry, fishing, honey collection and woodcutting. The principal land uses in state are agriculture,
forests, wasteland, wetland, human settlement and industrial sector.

Administrative and political profile

West Bengal was created as a constituent state of the Indian Union on 15 August 1947 as the
result of partition of the undivided British Indian province of Bengal into West Bengal. As in other
states, there is a three-tier panchayat system, except in Darjeeling district which is governed
by the Gorkha Hill Council . There are at present 3437 gram panchayats (at village level), 331
panchayat samitis (at block level) and 18 zilla parishads (at district level).

Conservation
The protected area network comprises 5 national parks, 15 sanctuaries, 2 tiger reserves, 1
elephant reserve and 1 biosphere reserve.1 Sundarbans (2585 sq km) and Buxa (759 sq km) are
two tiger reserves. There are also the elephant reserves of Eastern Dooars and Mayurjharna in
the state. Sundarbans is an important biosphere reserve (9,630 sq km) encompassing parts of the
Ganges delta and the Brahmaputra river system.
The East Calcutta wetlands with an expanse of 12,500 ha is one of important 25 Ramsar sites
designated by the Ramsar Bureau. These wetlands (22º25’ to 22º40’ N and 88º20’ to 88º35’E) are
critical for their waste recycling properties. The system is described as ‘one of the rare examples
of environmental protection and development management where a complex ecological process
has been adopted by local farmers for mastering the resource recovery activities.’2 Five more
Ramsar sites are proposed in the state3. Many species in the deltaic Sunderbans like tiger, fishing
cat, Gangetic dolphin, little porpoise, adjutant stork, osprey, saltwater crocodile, olive ridley turtle,
etc. have been categorized under endangered status due to habitat destruction and deterioration
of water quality.
West Bengal was among the leading states in implementing Joint Forest Management (JFM). In
fact, its participatory forest management programmes seem to have inspired the Indian Forest
Policy of 1988, which emphasized participatory forest management in the rest of India. The forest
department currently recognizes 3545 forest protection committees (FPCs); of these 17 FPCs have
only women members. In Sunderbans area there are 33 FPCs with 13527 members, protecting 567
sq km of mangrove forest. The state also has 52 watershed committees for better management
of watersheds. Additionally there are 99 ecodevelopment committees (EDCs) in 2 tiger reserves,
2 national parks and 3 sanctuaries, for encouraging joint participatory action for biodiversity
conservation in protected areas.
 West Bengal 779

Table 1: Some of the notable examples of community conserved areas and community
involvement in protected areas

Sr. Name of Area Location Kind of Effort Area

No.
1. Bankura Village Bankura District Protection of forest under Joint Not available
Forest Management
2. Chandana and Kharagpur District Forest protection with forest 160 ha
Harinakuri department
3. Jaldapara WLS Jalpaiguri District Protection of Wildlife Sanctuary Not available
with help of villagers
4. Jogyanagar Birbhum District Heronry protection Not available

5. Makaibari Darjeeling District Forest protection with tea estate 673 ha

6. Rashikbeel Cooch Behar Protection of wetland through 100 ha
District formation of FPC

7. Singalila National Darjeeling District Afforestation and waste Not available

Park management in the NP

Out of the above, Jogyanagar, Makaibari and Rashikbeel are dealt with in detail in the case
studies section.

This information about the state has been compiled by Saili S. Palande of Kalpavriksh based
on: State Steering Committee for NBSAP (West Bengal Chapter), Biodiversity Strategy Action
Plan, West Bengal. Prepared under National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Ministry of
Environment and Forests (Government of India). (Contained in CD with reference at endnote 1)

Endnotes
1
TPCG and Kalpavriksh, Securing India’s Future: Final Technical Report of the National Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan. Prepared by the NBSAP Technical and Policy Core Group (Delhi/Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).
2
http://www.ramsar.org/profile/profiles_india.htm
3
M.Z. Islam and A.R. Rahmani, Potential Ramsar Sites in India (Mumbai, IBCN:BNHS and Birdlife International,
2006).

state chapter - west bengal

 CCA/WB/CS1/Birbhum/Jogyanagar/Heronry

Jogyanagar, Birbhum
Background
Jogyanagar is a village situated in Birbhum district of south-western Bengal. It is located at a
distance of 13 km from Shantiniketan. This village is an abode for the open-billed storks that flock
this area for nesting and breeding, and is well known for this in the region. The inhabitants of the
village are Muslims and are dependent on rice cultivation.

Towards community conservation

The villagers of Jogyanagar have been traditionally protecting the habitat of the birds, which
are the mango and tamarind trees in the village. According to the villagers, the avian visitors
flock in their thousands each year during the nesting season, which begins from June and ends in
October.
The relationship with the birds is traditional and symbiotic. While the birds get protection in the
village, villagers benefit from using the bird droppings as fertilizer in the fields.

Opportunities and constraints

Very often these birds visit the rice fields of the neighbouring villages, where they are hunted
or trapped. Any attempts by the villagers from Jogyanagar to oppose these activities leads to the
action being given a communal twist. Though a series of ecological and social impact assessments
of the system have been done by the Visva Bharati University and other institutions, for the
villagers nothing much has come out of it. The forest department (FD) has shown little interest in
supporting the villagers or protecting the birds. The villagers strongly feel that the FD must take
up the responsibility of protecting the birds and also help the villagers in doing this.

Conclusion
This case shows that protection of species by local villagers often happens based on sentiments,
tradition and mutual understanding. However, given the changing socio-economic scenario, these
villagers need support to be able to carry on with these efforts. This support can be legal, financial
or political.

This case study has been compiled Joy Dasgupta for this Directory in 2001. He is currently at
ICIMOD, Kathmandu.

For more details contact:

Joy Dasgupta
case studies - west bengal

Assistant Coordinator, Strengthening ABSBIO-EH

(Access and Benefit-sharing of Biological Resources in the Eastern Himalayas)
Culture, Equity, Gender and Governance (CEGG) Programme
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD)
P.O. Box 3226
Kathmandu, Nepal
Tel: 00977-1-2210319 (R) 977-1-5525313 (O)
Email: dasjoy@hotmail.com

781
 CCA/WB/CS2/Cooch Behar/Rasikbeel/Wetland

Rasikbeel, Cooch Behar

Background
Rasikbeel is a wetland ecosystem in Cooch Behar district in northern Bengal. It is located around
34 km from the sub-divisional office at Alipurduar and around 37 km from the district headquarters
at Cooch Behar.
The beel (waterbody) covers an area of 1 sq km. This wetland has been a breeding ground
for diverse species of birds. The lake shelters around 40 species of migratory ducks such as
mergansers that descend here during the winter season from late November till early March. The
vegetation around the lake consists of a mosaic of crop fields, bamboo groves and degrading moist
deciduous forest patches, along with a few plantations. The beel is a major attraction for bird
watchers.
The government is also encouraging tourism here. The legal status of the wetland is reserved
forest (RF) under the jurisdiction of the Forest Development Corporation (FDC).

Towards community conservation

According to the villagers, this area had severely degraded prior to 1991. Indiscriminate hunting
of birds had led to a sharp fall in the bird population. Even the birds which came to breed here
were facing serious problems because of the lake being nearly choked by the water hyacinth. This
situation led to the forest department initiating a wetland restoration programme in the area.
As a result, a forest protection committee (FPC) was formed in 1991. The overall management
of the beels now rests with the FPC, which consists of 432 members from the three hamlets of
Octamochor, Chengtimari and Rasikbeel. These three villages are forest villages, as they were part
of the taungya system1 since the 1960s. These villagers are inhabited by a diversity of communities
such as the Santhals, Rabhas, Kochs, Bengalis and Kharias. After the forestry operations have
nearly stopped in the area, the main occupation of the villagers is rainfed agriculture and collection
of forest produce. Fishing is also carried out in the lake as a supplement to the income.
The protection efforts were further strengthened in 1995 when the FDC stepped in to build
a tourist complex in the area. The FDC introduced eco-tourism, with the central objective of
sustaining the natural habitat of the birds while promoting tourism. Tourism would also help the
local livelihoods, increasing participation of local communities in bird protection.

Impacts of community effort

Involvement of the FPC in the protection of the birds is believed to have considerably reduced the
extent of hunting in the area. Additionally, the forests in the vicinity have also regenerated.
Under an informal arrangement with the FDC, the FPC is entitled to 25 per cent of the total
revenue generated through tourism. The FPC also earns from the sale of firewood and bamboo.
This fund is used for common village development activities. Encouragement of tourism in the area
case studies - west bengal

has led to economic uplift of the villagers.

Opportunities and constraints

Although the FDC calls their effort an eco-tourism effort, the scheme is geared towards converting
this place into a conventional picnic spot. There are few efforts if any to facilitate tourism that is
sensitive to local needs, including the needs of the birds and people. Tourism, particularly between
the months of December and early February and especially on weekends, has increased many-
fold. The overnight tourists are usually the ones interested in birds, but the day tourists come
primarily for picnics. There are approximately 250-300 cars that visit the area on weekends. Noise
pollution generated by this influx causes serious disturbance to the nesting birds.

782
 West Bengal 783

Although the FPC has managed to ban loudspeakers in the area, they have not yet managed to
deal with enormous amount of waste generated by the picnickers. The rapid spread of hyacinth
and the consequent choking of the native plants in the lake is another emerging problem that
needs to be urgently tackled.
Despite all efforts the regular census since 2000 has shown a decline in the number of birds.
The reasons for this could be a combination of the above-mentioned reasons and some others.
However, currently there are proposals to declare this wetland as a legally Protected Area (PA).
Once declared a PA, utilization of the lake for any purposes by the local people will be affected.
This is likely to strain the relationship between the people and the FD. Whether the area needs any
legal protection, and, if yes, what, is an issue that needs to be carefully assessed.

Conclusion
This case study reflects a fairly progressive effort towards conservation. The FPC has played
a crucial role in implementing economic incentives for the villagers. However in doing so it has
to maintain a balance between commercialisation and resource sustenance. Hence the FPC’s
objectives have to be focused on the people’s benefit along with conservation.

This case study has been compiled Joy Dasgupta for this Directory in 2001. He is currently at
ICIMOD, Kathmandu.

For more details contact:

Joy Dasgupta
Assistant Coordinator, Strengthening ABSBIO-EH
(Access and Benefit-sharing of Biological Resources in the Eastern Himalayas)
Culture, Equity, Gender and Governance (CEGG) Programme
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD)
P.O. Box 3226
Kathmandu, Nepal
Tel: 00977-1-2210319 (R) 977-1-5525313 (O)
Email: dasjoy@hotmail.com

Endnotes
1
A system under which people were settled on government forest lands in order to carry out forestry operations for
the FD. As an incentive the villagers were given some land to live on and cultivate for personal use. These villages
did not have any rights over the forests or its produce.
case studies - west bengal
 CCA/WB/CS3/Darjeeling/Makaibari/Forest protection in a tea estate

Makaibari, Darjeeling
Background
Makaibari is one of the few tea estates in the world that has more land under forest cover than
tea bushes. It offers a model for conservation, while also being engaged in production. It is one
of the very few community areas that has been progressive. It is located in Darjeeling district,
nestled in the foot of the Himalayas. Makaibari Tea Estate (MTE) is located about 3 km south-
west of Kurseong, at an elevation of 900-1200 m above sea level. The tea estate covers 673 ha
but only 274 ha are cultivated with tea bushes. Makaibari is neither a PA (protected area) nor a
RF (reserved forest); yet it has all the components of an ecosystem that includes people, wildlife,
forests and cattle, and has managed to enrich its biodiversity and protect the forest area.
The forest of Makaibari is a sub-tropical rainforest, and the tea estate retains 70 per cent of its
area under forest cover. The average rainfall varies from 3000-3500 mm and the average number
of rainy days is 120 in a year. The fauna species in the forest area are in abundance, and comprise
leopard, barking deer, peacock, goral, monkeys, wild boar and various bird species including the
hornbill.
The villages are inhabited by the Gorkha community, who are either Hindus or Buddhists. This
village follows the system of caste hierarchy, wherein the brahmins are at the higher rungs followed
by the limbus and rais. The kamis occupy the lowest rung of the ladder. The number of people
inhabiting this area is 1500, out of which 610 are employed at the tea estate. The women are
generally pluckers, as they pluck the leaves from the tea bushes whereas the men are employed
as ‘sicklers’ who trim the tea bushes. The people are spread across the villages of Makaibari,
Thapthally, Kodobari, Phulbari, Cheptai, Chunagai and Koilapani.

Towards community conservation

Makaibari is one of the oldest tea estates, established in 1859. It is being run by Rajah Bannerjee,
the head of the family that has traditionally owned the estate. Despite the ownership of the forests
by this family, the local villagers also depend on these forests for their everyday needs such as dry
wood, fodder, etc. There are many myths, beliefs, customs and traditions associated with these
forests, which ensure that while meeting the needs these forests are not over-exploited. Apart
from this the villagers have appointed forest rangers who patrol the forests to keep a vigil on
intruders interested in timber smuggling and poaching.
A joint body committee (JBC) is the local institution that implements and monitors various socio-
economic programmes and issues, including conservation of all the seven villages. It consists of
elected members from each village, along with some representatives from the MTE management.
All the powers are vested in the hands of the JBC, meetings of which are held weekly. The JBC also
discusses the issues of overall village development. Any offender is handed over to the JBC, which
in turn decides the punishment or the fine. The women have organized a Mahila Samiti, which is
an offshoot of local political parties.
Forest conservation greatly benefits the tea cultivation. The tea cultivation system followed here
case studies - west bengal

is based on the bio-dynamic method of cultivation that was developed in 1924 by Rudolf Steiner.
Under this method the tea bushes become a part of the larger ecosystem that is typical of a sub-
tropical rainforest. The ground underneath the bushes is full of life, and they also attract various
birds and insects. The local people prepare the compost that is crucial to this method of farming.
Each household at Makaibari looks after a compost heap that consists of cowdung from their own
cattle, the pruning litter from the tea bushes, and the organic waste material from their kitchens.
The compost is enriched with yarrow, nettle, cowdung and other natural plant materials. This is
later sold to the management of the estate, which further treats it with homoeopathic preparations.
The compost is applied to the tea bushes, which represents a symbiotic relationship between the
forest and the tea bushes.
The forests contribute to the tea culture such that the canopy cover prevents the direct scorching
of the tea leaves, thereby retaining the moisture. Insects are attracted to the plants in the forests
784
 West Bengal 785

rather than the tea leaves. The forests also harbour the birds to feed on insect pests of tea
leaves.
There are many local customs that further contribute towards the conservation of these forests.
The people of Makaibari believe in the Bandevta or the jungle god, who resides in the ‘koheli’ bird
(the scientific name of the bird could not be verified). This bird is never seen during the day and
is only recognized by the peculiar sound of ‘ku ku’ at sunset. Another abode of the jungle god that
they believe in is the chillauni tree (a kind of hardwood found in North-East Indian forests). These
trees dot the forest and are found in the homesteads. A prayer is conducted during the spring
season (Baisakh) by offering sindhur (vermilion powder), mithai (sweets) and supari (betelnut).
Besides, a number of other trees are also considered sacred by the villagers, such as the ber that
requires a pandit (priest) to conduct the ceremony, unlike the tulsi and peepal trees, which are
worshipped by the villagers directly. The villagers also believe in Banjhakri, an evil spirit that roams
in the forest and takes possession of small children in certain areas in the forests. This restricts the
entry to those areas. These restricted areas are believed to have the highest concentration of wild
animals. The cattle is stall-fed rather than taken to the forest for the fear of them being attacked
by leopards. It is easier for the villagers to collect the urine and dung of the cattle, which is used
in the compost in each household.
Each of the villages is provided a part of the forest for resource use and prevention of conflict
among the different villagers. In order to reduce the pressure on the forests, each household has
been provided with an LPG through partial contributions made by the workers. Timber for the
construction of houses is procured from the nearby town of Siliguri by the MTE management. Other
than fuel and fodder, some roots, tubers, fruits and medicinal plants are also extracted from the
forest. There is no commercial extraction of NTFP, apart from a few women who sell fruits in the
nearby town of Kurseong.
The MTE management emphasises direct and indirect benefits to the local people, in order to
effectively implement forest protection along with motivating people. Every year the villagers
select a part of the forest for planting tree saplings. The forest area and the plant species are
decided by the respective village committees. In order to benefit the people, the management
recommends one out of five trees to be a fruit tree that is to be planted and then nurtured by the
people. All the villagers actively participate in protecting the forest from intruders, while a group
of 18 forest rangers selected from the villages has been appointed to patrol the area. The rangers’
group comprises representatives from the management too, including the owner of the estate.

Impacts of community effort

As a result of prolonged conservation efforts, this area has a dense forest cover. The forest
cover results in the prevention of landslides and soil erosion. Peacocks that were never heard
here can now be heard all over the forest. Interestingly, while the leopard population seems to be
decreasing everywhere in Darjeeling, they appear to have increased in the forests of Makaibari.
The forest rangers who patrol the forest area record the observations of wildlife made by them
regularly in a logbook
As an incentive towards conservation efforts, a number of schemes towards social upliftment of
local people have been implemented. These schemes have improved the socio-economic, health,
education and employment status of the local villagers.

Opportunities and constraints

The owner of Makaibari attributes the production of high-quality tea to the thriving sub-tropical
case studies - west bengal

rain forest in the area. The tea estate of Makaibari is a perfect example of conservation, wildlife
management, and meeting local livelihood needs. There have been a few instances of poaching and
timber smuggling that have been confronted by the forest rangers. In the nearby tea estates there
are problems such as leopard poisoning and destroying elephant corridors to cultivate tea. The
people working on the other tea estates have more difficult access to fuelwood and fodder. The fact
that the youth are not keen on working on the estates and are looking for better opportunities on
par with their education is an issue that will have to be dealt with by the management in future.

Conclusion
This case study reflects a very progressive and fruitful result of people’s initiatives and action
towards biodiversity and socio-economic progress. However, Makaibari cannot remain as an island
786 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

of success; if it is not replicated in other areas to reduce deforestation, the pressure will eventually
fall on the forests of Makaibari as well. The model of the tea estate of Makaibari can be replicated
in many other areas as well.

This case study was written by Bahar Dutt for this Directory in 2002. She is currently with
CNN-IBN.

For more details contact:

Bahar Dutt
J-27-A, Jangpura Extension
New Delhi 110014
E-mail: bahardutt@yahoo.com
Annexure 1: List of case studies in alphabetical order
Site State Page no.
Abhor (13 villages) Punjab 565
Adiyal tekdi Maharashtra 411
Ajeevali village Maharashtra 402
Amakhera village Uttar Pradesh 695
Apatani valley Arunachal Pradesh 139
Aravanchal Kavu Kerala 343
Ashtamudi lake Kerala 346
Balukhand Konark Sanctuary Orissa 530
Baripada village Maharashtra 389
Behroonguda village Andhra Pradesh 111
Belgata village Maharashtra 372
Bhaonta-Kolyala villages Rajasthan 587
Binjgiri hill (8 villages) Orissa 510
Bolunda village Maharashtra 410
Botha village Maharashtra 367
Budhikhamari village Orissa 502
Chakrashila Sanctuary Assam 159
Chamanpur village Chhattisgarh 194
Changtongya village Nagaland 465
Chhitkul village Himachal Pradesh 250
Chishilimi village Nagaland 466
Chittarangudi village Tamil Nadu 660
Chizami and 5 other neighbouring villages Nagaland 460
Chorati village Maharashtra 375
Dakhyatgaon village Uttarakhand 768
Daupur village Uttar Pradesh 696
Dengajhari village Orissa 514
Dhani Panch Mouza (5 villages) Orissa 517
Dharamghar region Uttarakhand 733
Doddabail hamlet, Bhairumbe Karnataka 314
Dungri Chopra village Uttarakhand 749
Gadabanikilo village Orissa 522
Ganeshpura village Chhattisgarh 197
Garoora village Jammu & Kashmir 279
Ghusuria village Orissa 504
Gursikaran forest (20 villages) Uttar Pradesh 697
Gwaldam village Uttarakhand 772
Halkar village Karnataka 316
Haryali Devi sacred grove Uttarakhand 773
Hiware Bazaar village Maharashtra 363
Holta village Uttarakhand 760
Hunsur village Karnataka 307
Huta village Orissa 534
Iringole Kavu Kerala 341
Jardhargaon village Uttarakhand 762
Jarmal village Orissa 538
Jharbeda village Orissa 542
Jhargoan village Orissa 498
Jogyanagar village West Bengal 781
Junawani, Ulnar and 12 other villages Chhattisgarh 191
Kaggaladu village Karnataka 311
Kailadevi Sanctuary Rajasthan 602
Kalpavalli (8 villages) Andhra Pradesh 114
Kalikasole village Orissa 506
787
788 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Kamla village Himachal Pradesh 245

Karundamunda village Chhattisgarh 198
Kawant region (98 villages) Gujarat 225
Khambi village Manipur 428
Khawrakrai village Assam 162
Khirakot village Uttarakhand 772
Khonoma village Nagaland 451
Khichan village Rajasthan 623
Kikruma village Nagaland 465
Kishori village Rajasthan 599
Kodbahal village Orissa 547
Kokare Bellure village Karnataka 302
Kolavipaalam Beach, Iringal Kerala 349
Kongan village Nagaland 465
Koondakulam village Tamil Nadu 666
Lakhapur village Maharashtra 377
Ledhor-Kala village Rajasthan 617
Lohathal sacred grove Uttarakhand 751
Loktak lake Manipur 417
Longwood shola Tamil Nadu 656
Luzophuhu village Nagaland 462
Mangaon village Maharashtra 409
Makaibari tea estate West Bengal 784
Makku and 8 other villages Uttarakhand 753
Malekpur village Gujarat 221
Maneshwar temple Orissa 536
Manglajodi village Orissa 488
Mantoor village Andhra Pradesh 122
Mapum village Manipur 429
Mcleodgunj and nearby villages (Pong wetland) Himachal Pradesh 249
Mega, Molo and Dipu villages Arunachal Pradesh 146
Melghar village Tripura 675
Mendha-Lekha village Maharashtra 392
Motichak village Bihar 171
Nagavalli village Karnataka 313
Nagchaund village Uttarakhand 766
Nahikalan village Uttarakhand 741
Nanj village Himachal Pradesh 256
Nellapattu & Vedurapattu villages Andhra Pradesh 125
New Kubing village Assam 164
Ngainga village Manipur 431
Padhar village Himachal Pradesh 252
Pakhi and Jalgwad villages Uttarakhand 739
Pambar shola Tamil Nadu 659
Panjawar village Himachal Pradesh 259
Patari Dang, Alampur village Rajasthan 619
Patharghara village Orissa 508
Pedullupalle village Andhra Pradesh 119
Phuljhar village Orissa 549
Pulicat lake Tamil Nadu 652
Rajain village Himachal Pradesh 247
Rasikbeel village West Bengal 782
Ravangaon and Shirsuphal villages Maharashtra 410
Rupabalia reserved forest (8 villages) Orissa 483
Rushikulya rookery Orissa 493
Sacred groves of Virajpet taluka Karnataka 299
Saigata village Maharashtra 379
 Annexures 789

Samantsinharpur, Andharua villages Orissa 526

Sangti valley Arunachal Pradesh 144
Satara Tukum village Maharashtra 384
Sendenyu village Nagaland 455
Shanag village Himachal Pradesh 254
Shankarghola village Assam 157
Sheikha Jheel Uttar Pradesh 700
Shiroor Alalli villages Karnataka 309
Shirui Hill, Shirui Manipur 434
Siddheshwar village Maharashtra 411
Simalgaon village Uttarakhand 737
Sova village Andhra Pradesh 127
Suali, Bhamti village Rajasthan 625
Suruguda village Orissa 553
Thalli village Himachal Pradesh 257
Thapaliya-Meharagaon village Uttarakhand 747
Thiang sacred grove (7 villages) Meghalaya 441
Tizu village Nagaland 466
Todar Majra, Makrian, Chunni Khurad,Makar & Majatri villages Punjab 568
Toufema village Nagaland 458
Udpuria village pond Rajasthan 621
Ufrain Khal Uttarakhand 773
Uppalapadu village Andhra Pradesh 121
Upper Ngatan village Manipur 425
Veerapuram village Andhra Pradesh 116
Zanibu peak Nagaland 466
Annexure 2: CCAs with location, ecosystem/kind of
initiatives and area (arranged state-wise)
Ecosystem/Kind of
No. Village District State Area
initiative
Forest conservation,
regeneration,
1 Behroonguda village Adilabad Andhra Pradesh soil and water 500 ha
conservation (also
JFM)
59 ha wasteland
regeneration +
Forest conservation,
108 ha Tamarind
2 Kalpavalli (8 villages) Anantpur Andhra Pradesh regeneration and
orchards + 3346
regulated use
ha contiguous
forests=3513
Forest conservation,
Kowdipally Mandal, regeneration and
3 Mantoor village Andhra Pradesh 24.28 ha
Medak regulated use (under
JFM)
Nellapattu & Doravarisatram Wetland; Protection
4 Andhra Pradesh 458 ha
Vedurapattu villages Mandal, Nellore of heronry
B. Kodur Mandal, Wetland; Protection
5 Pedullupalle village Andhra Pradesh NA
Cadappa of heronry
Forest conservation,
regeneration and
6 Sova village Vishakapattanam Andhra Pradesh NA
regulated use (under
JFM)
Pedakakani Mandal, Wetland; Protection
7 Uppalapadu village Andhra Pradesh 2.02 ha
Guntur of heronry
Chilamathur Mandal, Wetland; Protection
8 Veerapuram village Andhra Pradesh 12.14 ha
Anantapur of heronry
Forest conservation
Arunachal
9 Apatani valley Lower Subhansari and sustainable 5200 ha
Pradesh
agriculture
Arunachal Forest; Protection of
10 Sangti valley West Kameng NA
Pradesh blacknecked crane
Mega, Molo and Dipu Arunachal
11 Along Forest; Sacred grove NA
villages Pradesh
Forest; protection of
Chakrashila
12 Dhubri Assam golden langur and 2000 ha
Sanctuary
other species
Forest conservation,
13 Khawrakrai village Karbi-Anglong Assam regeneration and 670 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
14 New Kubing village North Cachar Hills Assam regeneration and 600 ha
regulated use
Conservation of
North Salmara,
15 Shankarghola village Assam forest and protection 50 ha
Bongaigaon
of golden langur
Protection of greater
16 Motichak village Bhagalpur Bihar and lesser adjutant NA
storks
Forests, soil and
17 Chamanpur village Pratappur, Sarguja Chhattisgarh 220 ha
water conservation
Forest conservation,
18 Ganeshpura village Ambikapur, Sarguja Chhattisgarh regeneration and 200 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Junawani and Ulnar
19 Bastar Chhattisgarh regeneration and 2400 ha
(with 12 villages)
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Karundamunda
20 Ambikapur,Sarguja Chhattisgarh regeneration and 100 ha
village
regulated use
Forest conservation,
21 Malekpur village Bhiloda, Vadodara Gujarat regeneration and 163 ha
regulated use

790
 Annexures 791

Forest conservation,
Kawant region (98
22 Vadodara District Gujarat regeneration and 20ha to 125ha
villages)
regulated use
Forest conservation, 10 ha-forest,
Himachal
23 Chhitkul village Sangla, Kinnaur regeneration and 30 ha- alpine
Pradesh
regulated use pastures
Mcleodgunj & nearby
Himachal Wetland; Protection
24 villages (Pong Dharamshala NA
Pradesh of birds
wetland)
Forest conservation,
Himachal
25 Kamla village Bhatiyat, Chamba regeneration and 5 ha
Pradesh
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Himachal
26 Nanj village Karsog, Mandi regeneration and 70 ha
Pradesh
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Himachal
27 Padhar village Manali, Kullu regeneration and 10 ha
Pradesh
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Himachal
28 Panjawar village Haroli, Una regeneration and 250 ha
Pradesh
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Himachal
29 Rajain village Bhatiyat, Chamba regeneration and 10 ha
Pradesh
regulated use
Himachal Forest conservation
30 Shanag village Manali, Kullu 200 ha
Pradesh and regulation
Forest conservation,
Himachal
31 Thalli village Karsog, Mandi regeneration and 35 ha
Pradesh
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Jammu &
32 Garoora village Baramulla regeneration and 40 ha
Kashmir
regulated use
Sacred groves of Coorg Virajpet,
33 Karnataka Forest; Sacred grove NA
Virajpet taluka Kodagu
Forest conservation,
Doddabail hamlet,
34 Sirsi, Uttar Kannada Karnataka regeneration and 10 ha
Bhairumbe
regulated use
Forest and estuary
89 ha forest +
Kumta , Uttar conservation
35 Halkar village Karnataka 60 ha mangrove
Kannada and mangrove
area
regeneration
36 Hunsur village Sagar Shimoga Karnataka Forest; Sacred grove 50 ha
37 Kokare Bellure village Mysore Karnataka Protection of heronry NA
38 Kaggaladu village Sira, Tumkur Karnataka Protection of heronry
Protection of slender
39 Nagavalli village Tumkur Karnataka NA
loris
Forest conservation,
40 Shiroor Alalli villages Sagar, Shimoga Karnataka regeneration and 40 ha
regulated use
Thalliparambu,
41 Aravanchal Kavu Kerala Forest; Sacred grove 2.83 ha
Kannoor
42 Ashtamudi lake Kollam, Kollam Kerala Estuary conservation 3800 ha
Perumbavoor,
43 Iringole Kavu Kerala Forest; Sacred grove NA
Eranakulam
Kolavipaalam Beach, Beach and turtle
44 Quilandi, Kozhikode Kerala 8 km
Iringal protection
Sacred grove,
45 Ajeevali village Maval , Pune Maharashtra sustainable resource 22 ha
use and development
Forest conservation,
46 Baripada village Dhule Maharashtra regeneration and 445 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
47 Belgata village Chandrapur Maharashtra regeneration and 141.64 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
48 Botha village Buldhana Maharashtra regeneration and 1510 ha
regulated use
792 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Forest conservation,
Brahmapuri,
49 Chorati village Maharashtra regeneration and 560 ha
Chandrapur
regulated use
Forest conservation,
50 Hiware Bazaar village Ahmadnagar Maharashtra regeneration and 976.84 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Brahmapuri,
51 Lakhapur village Maharashtra regeneration and 240 ha
Chandrapur
regulated use

52 Mangaon village Velhe, Pune Maharashtra Forest; Sacred grove 18 ha

Forest conservation,
53 Mendha-Lekha village Gadchiroli Maharashtra regeneration and 1900 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Brahmapuri,
54 Saigata village Maharashtra regeneration and 280 ha
Chandrapur
regulated use
55 Bolunda village Goregaon, Bhandara Maharashtra Forest; Sacred grove 3 ha
Protection of
grassland and
Ravangaon and Daund and Baramati
56 Maharashtra species such as NA
Shirsuphal villages respectively, Pune
macaques, chinkara,
blackbuck and wolf
Forest conservation,
57 Adiyal tekdi Mul, Chandrapur Maharashtra regeneration and 30 ha
regulated use
58 Siddheshwar village Rajura, Chandrapur Maharashtra Forest; Sacred grove 350 ha
Forest conservation,
Pombhurna,
59 Satara Tukum village Maharashtra regeneration and 285 ha
Chandrapur
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Ukhrul (foot hill of
60 Mapum village Manipur regeneration and NA
Shirui Kashong peak)
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Ukhrul (Western
61 Ngainga village Manipur regeneration and 143 ha
Ukhrul)
regulated use
Forest conservation,
62 Khambi village Phungyar,Ukhrul Manipur regeneration and 300 ha
regulated use
Wetland protection
63 Loktak lake Bishnupur Manipur 4455 ha
and conservation
Forest conservation,
64 Upper Ngatan village Senapati Manipur regeneration and 400 ha
regulated use
Protection of siroy
65 Shirui Hill, Shirui Ukhrul Manipur NA
lily plant
Thiang sacred grove Forest; Revival of
66 Ri Bhoi Meghalaya NA
(7 villages) sacred grove
Chizami and Forest conservation,
67 neighbouring 5 Phek Nagaland regeneration and >100 ha
villages regulated use
Protection of
forests, hunting
68 Khonoma village Kohima Nagaland ban, tragopan bird 20000 ha
protection, and
traditional agriculture
500 ha- forest
Protection of forest, reserve + 250
69 Luzophuhu village Phek Nagaland
wildlife and fishes ha-wildlife
reserve
Protection of forest
70 Sendenyu village Kohima Nagaland 1000 ha
and hunting ban
Protection of forest
71 Changtongya village Mokokchung Nagaland and hunting, fishing NA
ban
 Annexures 793

Protection of forest
72 Kongan village Naginimora, Mon Nagaland and hunting, fishing NA
ban
Forest conservation,
73 Kikruma village Phek Nagaland regeneration and 70 ha
regulated use
74 Zanibu peak Phek Nagaland Forest protection > 10000 ha
Forest protection and
75 Chishilimi village Zonheboto Nagaland NA
hunting, fishing ban
76 Tizu village Zonheboto Nagaland Regulated fishing NA
Forest protection
ecotourism, and
77 Toufema village Kohima Nagaland 1600 ha
ban on hunting and
felling in forest
Balukhand Konark Forest and mangrove
78 Puri Orissa 7172 ha
Sanctuary conservation
Forest conservation,
Binjgiri hill (8
79 Nayagarh, Puri Orissa regeneration and 360 ha
villages)
regulated use
Forest conservation,
80 Budhikhamari village Mayurbhanj Orissa regeneration and 3247 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
81 Dengajhari village Ranpur , Nayagarh Orissa regeneration and 80 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Dhani Panch Mouza
82 Ranpur, Nayagarh Orissa regeneration and 839.75 ha
(5 villages)
regulated use
Forest conservation
83 Gadabanikilo village Ranpur, Nayagarh Orissa and bauhinia (mohul) 60 ha
regeneration
Forest conservation,
84 Ghusuria village Barasahi, Mayurbhanj Orissa regeneration and NA
regulated use
Forest conservation,
85 Kalikasole village Mayurbhanj Orissa regeneration and NA
regulated use
Mahashir fish
86 Huta village Sambalpur Orissa Village tank
protection
Forest conservation,
Sadar Sundergarh,
87 Jarmal village Orissa regeneration and 72.44 ha
Sundergarh
regulated use
Forest conservation,
88 Jharbeda village Bonai, Sundargarh Orissa regeneration and NA
regulated use
Forest conservation,
89 Jhargoan village Jharsuguda Orissa regeneration and 64.34 ha
regulated use
Protection of spotted
90 Kodbahal village Hemgir, Sundargarh Orissa 200 ha
deer
Protection of
91 Maneshwar temple Sambalpur Orissa 2.5 - 3.0 ha
freshwater turtle
Wetland; Protection
92 Manglajodi village Chilka Lake, Ganjam Orissa 150 ha
of migratory birds
Forest conservation,
93 Patharghara village Chandua, Mayurbhanj Orissa regeneration and NA
regulated use
Forest conservation,
94 Phuljhar village Bisra, Sundargarh Orissa regeneration and > 100 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Rupabalia reserved
95 Dhenkanal Orissa regeneration and 900 ha
forest (8 villages)
regulated use
Beach and olive
Depending on the
96 Rushikulya rookery Ganjam Orissa ridley sea turtle
nesting site
protection
Forest conservation,
Samantsinharpur,
97 Nayagarh Orissa regeneration and 300 ha
Andharua villages
regulated use
794 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

Forest conservation
98 Suruguda village Sundergarh Orissa 120 ha
and regeneration
Protection of
blackbuck and
99 Abhor (13 villages) Ferozepur Punjab 7000 ha
khejari (Prosopis)
tree
Todar Majra, Makrian,
100 Chunni Khurad,Makar Ropar Punjab Protection of peafowl 404.8 ha
& Majatri villages
Forest conservation
Bhaonta-Kolyala
101 Alwar Rajasthan and regeneration and 600 ha
villages
water harvesting
Forest conservation,
Karauli & Sapotra,
102 Kailadevi Sanctuary Rajasthan regeneration and 67400 ha
Karauli
regulated use
Protection & feeding
103 Khichan village Udaipur Rajasthan 1 ha
of demoiselle cranes
Forest conservation,
104 Kishori village Alwar Rajasthan regeneration and NA
regulated use
Forest conservation,
105 Ledhor-Kala village Karauli Rajasthan regeneration and 375 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
Patari Dang (Hill),
106 Karauli Rajasthan regeneration and 66 ha
Alampur village
regulated use
Forest conservation,
107 Suali, Bhamti village Udaipur Rajasthan regeneration and 6 ha
regulated use
Wetland; protection
108 Udpuria village pond Kota Rajasthan 2 ha
of heronry
Muthukulathoor, Wetland; protection
109 Chittarangudi village Tamil Nadu 700 ha
Ramanathapuram of heronry
Wetland; protection
110 Koondakulam village Tirunelveli Tamil Nadu 129 ha
of heronry
Protection of shola
111 Longwood shola Kothagiri, Coimbatore Tamil Nadu 116 ha
forest and grassland
Protection of shola
112 Pambar shola Kodaikanal, Palni Hills Tamil Nadu 100 ha
forest and grassland
Wetland; regulated
113 Pulicat lake Nellore Tamil Nadu 6000 ha
lagoon fishing
Forest conservation,
114 Melghar village West Tripura Tripura regeneration and 13000 ha
regulated use
Wetland; protection
115 Amakhera village Gopi , Aligarh Uttar Pradesh 50 ha
of migratory birds
Wetland; protection
116 Daupur village Javan, Aligarh Uttar Pradesh 150 ha
of migratory birds
Forest conservation,
Gursikaran Forest (20
117 Koil, Aligarh Uttar Pradesh regeneration and 178 ha
villages)
regulated use
Wetland; protection
118 Sheikha Jheel Aligarh Uttar Pradesh 25 ha
of bird species
Forest conservation,
119 Dakhyatgaon village Uttarkashi Uttarakhand regeneration and 300 ha
regulated use
Berinag, Bageshwar & Forest protection
120 Dharamghar region Uttarakhand NA
Kapkot, Pithoragarh through sanctification

Forest conservation,
Yamkeshwar, Pauri
121 Dungri Chopra village Uttarakhand regeneration and 40 ha
Garhwal
regulated use

Forest conservation,
122 Holta village Tehri Garhwal Uttarakhand regeneration and NA
regulated use
 Annexures 795

Forest conservation,
regeneration and
123 Jardhargaon village Tehri Garhwal Uttarakhand NA
revival of traditional
agrobiodiversity
Lohathal sacred Forest protection
124 Berinag, Pithoragarh Uttarakhand 235 ha
grove through sanctification
Makku village van Forest conservation,
125 panchayat (Makku Rudraprayag Uttarakhand regeneration and 2237.5 ha
and 8 villages) regulated use
Forest conservation,
126 Nagchaund village Tehri Uttarakhand regeneration and 30 ha
regulated use
Forest conservation,
regeneration and
127 Nahikalan village Dehradun Uttarakhand NA
revival of traditional
agrobiodiversity
Forest conservation,
Pakhi and Jalgwad
128 Gopeshwar , Chamoli Uttarakhand regeneration and 240 ha
villages
regulated use
Forest conservation,
129 Simalgaon village Bageshwar Uttarakhand regeneration and NA
regulated use
130 Gwaldam village Chamoli Uttarakhand Forest; sacred grove NA
Forest conservation,
131 Khirakot village Almora Uttarakhand regeneration and NA
regulated use
Haryali Devi sacred
132 Chamoli Uttarakhand Forest; sacred grove NA
grove
Forest conservation,
Thapaliya-Mehargaon
133 Nainital Uttarakhand regeneration and 385 ha
village
regulated use
Eco-spiritual
134 Ufrain Khal Pauri Uttarakhand NA
movement
Wetland; protection
135 Jogyanagar village Birbhum West Bengal NA
of heronry
Forest conservation
and natural resource
136 Makaibari tea estate Darjeeling West Bengal 673 ha
management of tea
estate
137 Rasikbeel village Cooch Behar West Bengal Wetland; ecotourism 100 ha
Annexure 3: Checklists of approaches and
activities for effective management, assessment and
greater recognition of CCAs.
Source: Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Kothari, A., Oviedo, G. (eds). Indigenous and Local Communities and
Protected Areas: Towards Equity and Enhanced Conservation Guidance on Policy and Practice for Co-
managed Protected Areas and Community Conserved Areas. Best Practices Protected Areas Guidelines
Series No.11. IUCN and Cardiff University. 2004
Check list 1: What to cover in a community-led in-depth assessment of CCAs

• The ecological and biological features, including habitat and species inventories, and trends in ecological status.

• The natural resources in the area and an analysis of the ecological impacts of resource use and other human
activities.

• The social and economic features of the area, including its historical development, socio-cultural resources and
socio-cultural relevance, current entitlements (both private and collective) economic benefits and costs, and equity
issues.

• The objectives for which the area is managed.

• As appropriate, the relevant IUCN management category to which the CCA could in theory be assigned.

• The body of customary and modern laws and rules that communities have evolved to govern the areas and the
extent to which such laws and rules are known and respected within and outside the community of concern.

• The key local actors and organizations that manage the area, including an analysis of their current vitality and
effectiveness.

• The differential rights and responsibilities assigned to different groups within the community, in particular regarding
socially disadvantaged groups such as women, ethnic and religious minorities, the landless and mobile peoples.

• The history of relationship between the community and official agencies, including how conflicts have been identified
and dealt with.

• The extent to which the community management practices manage to maintain ecological values and address
socio-cultural and economic needs.

• A threat assessment for the CCA, noting threats from both within and outside the community, including to the
sustainability of their management practices.

• An identification of conservation needs and opportunities, including needs to protect and restore ecosystems, and
of the community’s collective vision for the future of the area.

• Extent and form of internal and external recognition and support given to the CCA, and by whom; and an assessment
of the importance of such recognition and support.

Check list 2: Questions for participatory monitoring and evaluation of CCAs

• Is the community fully in control of governance and management of the CCA?

• Does it possess all the necessary capacities?

• Is the CCA, as currently governed and managed by the community, likely to be sustained in the long run in
financial, institutional and social terms?

• Is the CCA well-managed? Is it helping to conserve ecosystems, species and environmental services?

• Is the CCA improving the community’s social, economic, and political situation?

• Are the cultural, intellectual, and other values and skills of the community being protected and enhanced because
of the CCA?

• Are the less privileged sectors of the community adequately involved in decision making about the CCA and
benefiting from it? Are inequities being reduced?

Check list 3: Steps towards gaining recognition of individual CCAs within the national or sub-national
protected area system

• Determine whether a CCA and its current governance system fit within the protected area definition and/or criteria

796
 Annexures 797
under national legislation and policy, as well as under IUCN and CBD definitions for the purposes of international
registries and classification.

• If so, determine whether it fits within the existing protected area categories of the country concerned. Could the
CCA qualify as a national park, sanctuary, game reserve, or other existing PA category? Importantly, would such a
category allow for the community’s own governance system to continue? Would it allow for management objectives
that may be conceptually and/or practically different from conservation per se?

• When national legislation and policies are fully compatible with local practice, conservation agencies should grant,
or formally recognise, that authority and decision-making powers for the management of the CCA should rest with
local communities. Importantly, this will enable them to enforce their decisions (as in the case in which an ordinance
for the control of fishing may provide the needed legal backing to a community declared marine sanctuary).

• When there is incompatibility between community management and national protected area categories, legal and
policy adjustments will be required to the current statutory provisions so that the relevant community can retain
its governance system.

• Often, what the communities request is a guarantee of customary tenure, use and access rights, usually sanctioned
through a demarcation of territories and resources.

• For that to happen, however, it may be necessary that the community institution in charge of the management of
the CCA be recognised as a legal persona. This may result in changes in the ways a community organizes itself and
manages the area. It is important that the community itself determines such matters.

• After the incompatibility is removed, the agency should embark on a process of negotiation, which may end
in a contractual arrangement between the community concerned and the national or sub-national conservation
authorities. This contractual arrangement may recognise the CCA and provide to it some form of legal protection
or support. In other cases, it may transform the area into a de facto Co-managed Protected Area.

• Once agreement has been reached between the community and the protected area agency about recognising the
CCA as a protected area, jointly agreed rules and regulations are needed for managing it. These may simply involve
recording the community’s existing rules, without interference from the state agencies, or incorporating new
advice, methods and tools. The rules should specify what kind of land and resource zoning exist, what community
and individual rights (including ownership) exist, what institutional structures manage the area, whether and how
sustainable resource harvesting is allowed to take place (e.g. with limits on quantity, species and seasons). It may
also be useful to clarify and record the subdivision of rights and responsibilities within the community itself and
to specify provisions against the misuse of rights and power on the part of both the community and government
authorities.

• Clarify how the CCA boundaries are to be effectively enforced and protected against external threats. What kind
of community-based surveillance and enforcement mechanisms are recognised by the state? For instance, can
community members apprehend violators? Who judges in the event of controversies? Who is responsible for the
information campaigns needed for the general public to respect CCAs?

Check list 4: Steps to strengthen community capacities and have their CCAs officially recognized

• Assess the feasibility of putting new capacities into practice and elicit the community’s felt needs.
Several issues are crucial here. Are the necessary human and financial resources available within the community
and from external agencies? Is the policy environment supportive of community institutions playing their roles or
is there a risk of raising false expectations? Is the community prepared to take on new capacities? Are there socio-
cultural impacts to be expected as new capacities are acquired? Have capacity building needs been identified by
communities and local organizations themselves or only by external partners?

• Provide capacity-building initiatives as soon as possible. Capacity building activities can begin as soon as
an agreement to work together has been reached between communities and the protected area agencies. At the
beginning, key community representatives may be asked to join information seminars and some training sessions.
Over time, community capacities should be strengthened in a structured and sequential manner, involving as many
local actors as possible.

• Have clear and transparent criteria about who should be involved. Relations within and between communities
should be taken into account in choosing whom to involve in capacity building, as this may lead to struggles for
influence within communities. To avoid this, clear and transparent selection criteria are important as well as relying
on more than one or a few individuals only. The criteria should be elicited from the community itself.

• Use locally appropriate methods, tailored to the specific situation. Using locally appropriate language and
methods is crucial to effective learning. ‘Learning by doing’ and visually oriented methodologies are generally much
better than lectures. Whereas intensive crash-courses and one-time training sessions can “trigger” new initiatives,
communities appear to benefit most from long-term support that is directly relevant to their specific situation.
798 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

• Ensure that capacity building is accompanied by strengthened roles, responsibilities and concrete
opportunities to put new skills into practice. Building capacities without effective avenues of using them may be
frustrating for the community.

• Monitor and evaluate the capacity-building exercise in an on-going way. Learning processes greatly benefit
from self-assessment and evaluation exercises. Feedback can then be used to adjust further initiatives in terms of
capacities addressed, participants, methods, etc.

Check list 5: Examples of economic and financial measures to support CCAs

• Cash and material rewards for outstanding conservation achievements.

• Grants to support specific work for conservation and local livelihoods.

• Financial incentives for conservation, including through compensation for lost opportunities.

• Payment for services rendered by the community to neighbouring communities or the wider world, e.g. protection
of water catchment or CO2 sequestration by forests, maintenance of genetic diversity with actual or potential wider
use in agriculture, medicine, industry and other sectors.

• Royalties or fees for the use of genetic resources or related knowledge, developed or maintained by the
community.

• Employment in works related to the conservation initiative or other unrelated works.

• Exclusive rights to business initiatives, including tourist accommodation and guiding, trophy hunting, producing
and selling handicrafts.

Check list 6: CCAs as systems of community-based rights and responsibilities

Land and resource rights are fundamental to the socio-cultural and economic life of indigenous peoples and local and
mobile communities. They provide them some measure of control over their own destinies and make worthwhile their
investment in those long-term activities that are needed for conservation and sustainable resource use. Different
communities claim different sets of rights to land and natural resources. Indigenous peoples may view Community
Conserved Areas as part of a broader bundle of territorial rights connected to self-determination, while other
communities may be more specifically concerned with accessing and using natural resources.
Most traditional rights are accompanied by corresponding responsibilities towards nature, natural resources and
fellow humans. Throughout all forms of possible legal recognition of Community Conserved Areas it is crucial that this
dual approach to rights and responsibilities is maintained, guarding against the possible misuse of rights to alienate
or destroy natural resources, or conversely, ensuring that responsibilities are not assigned without the necessary
rights and powers to enable their fulfillment. One of the major lessons learned in the last decades of field-based
conservation is that management improves when the rights and responsibilities are assigned in a fair and balanced
way to each of the parties to an agreement.
Annexure 4: Indian laws and policies relevant to community conserved areas
Act Provision/s Strengths Weaknesses
National Acts
Many communities conserving forest In its true spirit, this provision has not been implemented anywhere in
This Act provides for the conversion ecosystems could apply for their CCAs to India in last 80 years. In the two states (Uttarakhand and Karnataka)
of Reserved Forests into Village be declared VFs. This could be one of the where some areas have been declared under this category, powers to the
Forests if the local communities best legal support for the forest CCAs as communities have been diluted and government retains a strong say in
Indian Forest ask for the same and fulfil certain this leaves the institutional arrangements, the constitution of the institutions as also in actual management. There
Act, 1927 requirements as per the Act. The rules and regulations largely to the local seems to be a reluctance in the government sector to hand over real
(IFA 1927) concerned communities are then communities as long as the objective of power to local communities.
vested the powers of the forest effective management and protection is
department for the management fulfilled. As per the Act the government retains the power to grant or withdraw the
of VFs. status of VFs, with no clear provision on how and under what conditions
such decisions should be taken.

Given the language used and the fact that the category Conservation
Reserves specifically mentions government lands, it appears that
Two new categories of PAs, Community Reserves allow inclusion of only community owned lands
namely, Community Reserves and Community Reserves can provide legal or privately owned lands. Most documented CCAs in India exist on
Wild Life Conservation Reserves, added. support to CCAs on private or community government lands, so may not be eligible to be declared Community
Protection lands. Reserves.
Community Reserves can be
Amendment declared on privately owned or As per the Act Community Reserves cannot be declared in existing
Acts, 1972 as Conservation Reserves for the first time in
community lands (the definition of Indian wildlife conservation history provide Protected Areas (PAs) and existing PAs cannot be converted to CRs
amended in which is not clear). without de-notifying them first.
2003 a space for consultation with local people
Conservation Reserves can be before declaration of the reserve and seeks The Act also mandates a uniform management institution, which is
(WLPA 2003) declared by the government their inputs in the management of the inappropriate to the very large diversity of management arrangements
on government owned lands in reserve. that communities have developed in CCAs across India.
consultation with the local people.
Most communities would not like to declare their CCAs as Conservation
Reserves because the category does not recognise existing systems of
community management and the overall in-charge remains the Chief
Wildlife Warden, with the community’s role being largely advisory.

Environmental Ecosystems and landscapes can Communities know little about this Act and how it can be used. There are
Protection Act, be notified Ecologically Sensitive Potentially a strong tool to fight against a number of ESA in the country, but none have been created specifically
1986 Areas (ESA). This would enable commercial and industrial pressures. to help CCAs. Its relevance for CCAs has not been really tested on ground
control or restricton of certain yet.
(EPA 1986)
identified commercial, industrial
and development activities.
Annexures 799
 Mandates decentralisation of
governance to rural bodies, like
panchayats (village councils) and
gram sabhas (village assemblies) in
predominantly tribal (“scheduled” Considered a revolutionary Act with a
Panchayati In most states where implemented, its provisions have been diluted in the
under constitution) areas. strong potential to integrate and enhance
Raj (Extension state adaptations of the Central Act.
conservation and livelihoods needs, help
to Scheduled Confers the ownership and communities to resist destructive forces. Additionally, government forests and PAs have been excluded from the
Areas) Act 1996 decision-making rights over non- jurisdiction of the Act.
timber forest products (NTFP) to
(PESA 1996) local institutions.
Mandates consultation with local
communities regarding many
developmental and other issues
relevant for a site.

Mandates creation of Biodiversity

Management Committees (BMC)
The provisions could be used to increase
at the village level. BMCs are
local community participation in wildlife
supposed to help communities
800 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

and biodiversity conservation, enhance

in management, protection and
livelihoods. The provision of Biodiversity
recording of local biological
Heritage Sites could be used to provide legal
diversity.
backing to CCAs, but this will depend on The BD Rules 2004 fail to empower BMCs to manage, use and conserve
Provides for the declaration of areas how BHS are defined and interpreted in the natural ecosystems. Their primary function is limited to recording local
being conserved for agricultural or Rules or Guidelines for their implementation, knowledge, and to help the state and national level boards to grant
Biological wildlife biodiversity as Biodiversity which were not formulated at the time this permission for the use of biological resources and knowledge associated
Diversity Act, Heritage Sites (BHS). annexure was written. BMCs could be strong with it, in their areas.
2002 local institutions for conservation, but again
This Act includes all elements of this will depend on what powers they are The rules for BHS have not yet been formulated (they were under
(BDA 2002) biological diversity, domestic and formulation while this publication was going to press) so the category has
given under Rules.
wild and provides for protection of not been implemented anywhere in the country yet.
all kinds of ecosystems. Some states like Karnataka and Sikkim have
gone beyond the national rules, and provided
The National Biodiversity Authority for greater empowerment and responsibilities
and the State Biodiversity Boards to communities for conservation and
established under the Act are management of biodiversity.
required to consult the local BMCs
while taking decisions related to
the use of biological resources and
knowledge associated with such
resources.
 Allows for a greater role and empowerment
of Gram Sabha (local governing bodies) in
determining claims, managing forests it has
traditionally conserved, checking processes There is lack of clarity on how the CF provision will be operationalised.
destructive of forest-dwellers’ habitats, and Much depends on the content of the rules that are currently being
protecting traditional knowledge. formulated.
Provides the establishment of
Scheduled
several rights to tribal and forest Allows for greater livelihood security for The fact that ‘encroachments’ on forest lands upto December 2005 are
Tribes
dependent communities, including forest-dwellers who have been unjustly eligible for regularization, gives rise to possibilities of misuse by vested
and Other
to forest lands and resources. The denied tenure, and mandates that any interests who will incite fresh encroachments. In some parts of India there
Traditional
Act also stresses co-existence in displacement and relocation can only happen is a fear that CCAs could also be affected by this.
Forest-Dwellers
PAs. by consent.
(Recognition of Certain development projects and activities (eg. construction of roads) for
Forest Rights) Empowers communities to declare Provides greater possibility of community the purpose of village development have been excluded from clearances
Act 2006 any forest that they have been involvement in government managed PAs. under the Forest Conservation Act. This opens up a potential for misuse at
conserving and protecting as some sites to allow destructive projects in forest areas.
(FRA 2006) Provides for legal backing of forested CCAs
Community Forests.
in the form of “Community Forest”. This is a This Act has an unclear relationship with existing forest/wildlife laws. In
category under which the local communities particular, the institutional arrangement for enforcement of community
can legally protect and manage any forest rights and responsibilities is not clear.
that they have been traditionally protecting
and can establish suitable institutions, rules
and regulations.
Wild Life
Protection This sets up a National Tiger
Some provisions could help explore people’s
Amendment Act Conservation Authority, and Remains within the overall framework of the WLPA, which provides very
participation in wildlife management. The
2006 provides a process for notifying little say or power to communities.
amendment is too recent to see any impacts.
tiger reserves.
(WLPA 2006)
State Acts
Some state level Acts are relevant,
e.g. the Village Council Act
of Nagaland mandates Village Under this act, dozens of CCAs are being
Councils (the local governance established and protected in Nagaland. It
body) to manage wildlife within provides them with a strong legal tool for
their jurisdiction. Unlike in rest fighting against commercial and industrial
of India, most land in Nagaland pressures.
is under community or private
ownership.
Annexures 801
 Policies and
Provisions Strengths Weaknesses
Action Plans
This policy for the first time after Indian
Independence places greater importance on
using local forest resources to meet local
people’s needs rather than industrial needs.
The policy stresses the involvement of local
people in the management of forests. In
particular tribal communities’ access to
the forests and resources on which their
livelihoods depend have been recognised.
This policy deals with conservation
and management of forests, It was under this policy that the Government
National Forest The policy has not been translated adequately into law as yet (the IFA
afforestation and with the rules Resolution on Joint Forest Management
Policy, 1988 1927 remains in place even today). It is for this reason that many of its
governing people’s access to (JFM) was passed in India in 1990. Since
(NFA 1988) then millions of ha of forests outside PAs progressive provisions have remained unimplemented.
government owned forests and
their products. have been brought under JFM. JFM is aimed
at regenerating degraded forests with the
participation of local communities and
sharing the benefits accruing from timber
harvests from these areas with the local
communities. JFM has been a miserable
802 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

failure in some states and sites while quite

successful in others, depending on the state
policies and the methods of implementation,
and often also on individual forest officers
and concerned local communities.
The plan envisages the involvement of local The NWAP does not go the full distance in establishing tenurial security
This plan deals with policy communities residing in and around PAs in and a share in decision-making of PAs for local communities.
imperatives and strategic actions the management of natural resources.
to conserve wildlife in and outside The most serious problem, however, is that even its progressive
National Wildlife PAs, to manage these PAs, to Their participation is recognized as an provisions have yet to make a difference, as implementation is seriously
Action Plan, prevent illegal trade on endangered effective tool for the management of PAs. lagging. Despite having identified specific timelines for achieving its
2002-2016 species, to ensure people’s objectives almost no move has been made towards its implementation.
participation in the conservation of According to this plan, local communities However, in the 11th 5 year plan (2008 onwards), is a programme
(NWAP) wildlife, to promote ecotourism in must participate in and benefit from emerging, to support CCAs.
PAs, among others. ecotourism developments in wildlife areas.
The legal environment needed to implement the NWAP is also not in
Community initiatives in conservation are place as the Wild Life Protection Act does not envisage full participation of
also to be supported. people in establishment and creation of PAs (as mentioned above).
This draft policy recognizes
Draft National community conservation
Biodiversity initiatives and stresses on legal, This draft of NBSAP had not been accepted by the government till
Strategy and administrative and all other kinds the time of writing this Directory. Neither was any alternative policy
Action Plan Contains a number of provisions for
of support for CCAs. NBSAP also suggested by the government. An alternative NBSAP has been prepared
supporting CCAs and JPAM.
stresses on developing guidelines by the government in 2009, which does not take into account many of the
(NBSAP) 2004
for implementation of Joint crucial points mentioned in the earlier draft.
Protected Area Management
(JPAM).
Annexure 5: Suggested guidelines for
establishment and management of Community
Reserves under the Indian Wild Life (Protection)
Amendment Act 20021

Some questions regarding community reserves

What is a Community Reserve?
Section 36C of the Wildlife (Protection) Amendment Act 2002 provides for the category of Community Reserves. As
per this provision:
“The state government may, wherever the community or an individual has volunteered to conserve wildlife and its
habitat, declare any private or community land not comprised within a National Park, sanctuary or a conservation
reserve, as a community reserve, for protecting fauna, flora and traditional or cultural conservation values and
practices.”
“After the issue of notification under sub-section (1) (above), no change in the land use pattern shall be made within
the community reserve, except in accordance with a resolution passed by the management committee and approval
of the same by the State Government”.
“The state government shall constitute, a Community Reserve Management Committee, which shall be the authority
responsible for conserving, maintaining and managing the community reserve.”
“The committee shall consist of five representatives nominated by the village panchayat or where such panchayat
does not exist by the members of the gram sabha and one representative of the state Forests or Wild Life Department
under whose jurisdiction the community reserve is located.”
“The committee shall be the competent authority to prepare and implement the management plan for the community
reserve and to take steps to ensure the protection of wild life and its habitat in the reserve”.
“The committee shall regulate its own procedure including the quorum”.

What kind of areas can be declared community reserves?

Any area that is privately owned or community owned and where the concerned individual or community volunteers
to conserve wildlife and habitat.
Areas that are under the jurisdiction of the government but are being conserved by local communities cannot be
declared as Community Reserves. It is also not clear whether land under institutions such as the local Panchayats,
or under revenue department of the government but earmarked for use by local communities could be declared
community reserves or not. In addition, there are large land areas the ownership of which is riddled with disputed
claims – either by their ancestral/long standing inhabitants due to deficiencies in the processes by which these have
been declared ‘government lands’ or even between different government departments.
Some examples of areas and initiatives that can prima facie be declared as community reserves include:
• Traditional conservation of Painted Stork and globally threatened Spot-billed Pelican nesting sites by villagers in
Kokkare Bellur village, Karnataka; and many other villages across India, where the land belongs to the village
or to individuals within it.
• Traditional irrigation tanks of South India which even today support a large diversity of water birds and other fauna
and flora, and which are considered village land (generally, those below 40 ha. would be considered as such, those
above this size would be under the government).
• Large areas in Punjab, Haryana and adjoining Rajasthan states that are being conserved and protected by the
Bishnoi community.2
• Khonoma Tragopan Sanctuary, declared by the villagers on their community owned land in Nagaland.
• Some sacred groves which still exist on private or community lands.
Not so clear is the case of Van Panchayat forests in Uttaranchal, which are under community control and management,
but are legally revenue or forest department land. Or the case of the 600 ha. of regenerated village forest in the
Loktak Lake catchment by Ronmei tribe in Tokpa Kabui village, Manipur India, including a ban on hunting of the
endangered Sangai deer; it is not clear who the land belongs to.

What kind of areas may not benefit from this clause?

• 1800 hectares of reserved forest protected by Gond tribal community in Mendha (Lekha) village, Maharashtra
state, India.;
• 600-700 hectares of forest department owned land, regenerated and protected by the villagers of Jardhargaon
village in Uttaranchal state ;
• Many hundreds of ha. of protected and reserve forests being protected and conserved as watershed of River Arvari
by nearly 90 villages in Alwar District of Rajasthan.

803
804 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

• Protection of sea turtle eggs, hatchlings, and the nesting sites on the beach (it is unclear which government
department this would be under) by fisherfolk community in Kolavipalam, Kerala, and in Morjim, Goa;
• Conservation of Gursikaran and Sheikha wetlands by surrounding villagers in Uttar Pradesh;
• Community forestry initiatives in several thousand villages of Orissa, Jharkhand and several other states in India,
known to be initiated as a response to degrading ecosystems as early as in 1936. Many of the committees in
Orissa now have district and state level federations for management, policy issues and conflict resolution. These
committees sometimes protect hundreds of hectares of contiguous forests. Legally these forests are ‘owned’ by
the government although till Independence, much of this area consisted of customary communal lands or common
lands for meeting community needs.
• Sacred groves, though fast depleting and losing their religious significance, are still being zealously preserved by
the local communities, including in Coorg district of Bangalore state, and Rajasthan state in India, although very
often these are also under the control of or owned by one or the other government agency.
Barring some states in the North-East and the jointly owned shamilat lands in Punjab and Haryana, where community
or shared ownership is legally recognised, the issue of ‘community’ ownership will need to be clarified. Even common
lands under the jurisdiction of Gram Panchayats technically belong to the government. The same applies to Van
Panchayat forests in Uttaranchal although these are mutated in the VP’s name in the land records.

Who declares a Community Reserve?

The state government declares a Community Reserve, but only if the concerned village community volunteers to get
their area declared as such.

What is the process of declaration of a Community Reserve?

The process of declaration of a community reserve is unclear from the Act. Although the resource owners are
expected to ‘volunteer’ to get their area declared a CR, questions like who, which and how many members of a
community recommend an area to be declared a community reserve require clarification. Similarly, how it is to be
ensured that all members of the community are agreeable for the declaration as Community Reserve needs to be
clarified. In the case of lands owned by one or more individuals, the adaptations required while declaring a ‘CR’ need
to be specified.

Who holds the jurisdiction and control over a community reserve?

Authority responsible for conserving, maintaining and managing a community reserve is a Committee to be chosen
by the panchayat and constituted by the state government, as described above.

How is a Community Reserve managed?

The committee shall be the competent authority to prepare and implement the management plan for the community
reserve. No further details have been specified in the Act.

What will be the benefits to an individual or a community from declaring their privately or community
owned area as a Community Reserve?
Apart from obtaining legal support in case of an external threat, it is not clear what other incentives individuals or
communities will have for getting their lands declared as community reserves. An unstated assumption could be that
government funds could be channeled into such Reserves. What impact such a declaration will have on the owners’
access to the area for livelihoods is also unclear. The provision for the requirement of prior approval of the state
government for any change in land use may generate apprehensions among land owners about their losing control
over their own lands for future land use changes for strengthening livelihoods. The lack of clarity in the division of
rights and responsibilities between resource owners/right holders, in fact, could act as a major disincentive.

What are the mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation of a Community Reserve?
Not specified in the Act. Presumably this falls into the functions of the Committee to prepare management plans and
ensure conservation.

What are the limitations of this provision in the current Act?

1. Procedures to be followed for declaration and management of a community reserve are not specified.

2. Community reserves can be declared on private and community owned lands only, so the community efforts on
government lands such as Reserve forests, cannot fit into this category. Barring the case of the north-eastern
states, most examples of community conservation efforts have been reported from lands owned by government
agencies.

3. The Act specifies the institution to be established for the management of the conservation reserve without
actually specifying the process to be followed for creation of the reserve, process of establishment of the locally
relevant management institution, roles and responsibilities, rights and powers, and so on.

4. Many communities/individuals potentially interested in getting their land/water bodies declared Community
Reserves, have existing institutions and systems of management, rules and regulations. The Act does not either
 Annexures 805

recognise the existence of such institutions or their diversity and potential for culturally and livelihood sensitive
approaches to conservation. Even where such institutions are not in place, it is unlikely that many individuals or
communities would want their resources to be managed by committees nominated by panchayats with forest
officials as members who may not have any connection with the resource or the conservation effort at all. This
prescription of a uniform institutional structure specified by the Act is likely to make the communities more
distrustful of government intentions instead of motivating them to bring their land and initiatives within the
community reserve framework.

5. The Act does not specify any exit path for communities/individuals in case they want to withdraw their resources
from the CR framework if they are dissatisfied with its functioning, or a mutually acceptable mechanism for
resolving disputes when they arise.

6. The Act does not allow for an existing National Park or Sanctuary to be declared a Community Reserve, even
though analysis may show that this would aid conservation. There is no clarity about the benefits to a community
for declaring their privately or community owned resource as a conservation reserve although the Act clearly
specifies duties and restrictions.

What could be done to overcome the above mentioned limitations?

The following two broad steps, in our opinion, are needed to meet the objectives of the WLPA towards creating a
larger network of protected areas and in furthering participatory conservation:

1. Amendment of the WLPA to overcome those of the above-mentioned limitations that cannot be dealt with by Step
2 below;

2. Framing of guidelines under the existing provisions of the WLPA, in order to achieve benefits while further
amendments are being considered. A number of the above shortcomings could be addressed through guidelines.
An MoU signed between the committee, the GP and the concerned department specifying the management
objectives of the CR, the rights, responsibilities and authority of the 3 parties, the process of setting up the CR,
and so on, through a transparent and open process of negotiations, could help overcome some of the lacuna.

What can be the process by which the guidelines for creation and management of Community Reserves
are framed?
Our suggestion is that a set of guidelines be drafted for implementing provisions of this Act following a fully
consultative process, learning from the experiences of existing laws and policies and from on-ground, community
based conservation efforts. This process could include:

1. Selection of a core group, including community women and men, FD, conservationists, NGOs, lawyers and
others, to guide the process of framing the rules/guidelines.

2. Preliminary brainstorming meeting of the core group to finalise the methodology of drafting the guidelines and
preparing an initial set of guidelines, based on existing information about community conserved areas (database
to be made available by Kalpavriksh and could also be requested from other organisations working on the
issue) and guidelines developed by other organisations/countries for similar objectives (eg by the IUCN WCPA/
CEESP Theme Group on Indigenous/Local Communities, Equity, and Protected Areas (TILCEPA), or the IUCN Co-
Management Working Gorup (CMWG)). The preliminary meeting could also prepare an initial list of potential sites
where a process for declaring Community Reserves and/or Conservation Reserves could be explored and tested
using existing information.

3. Wider circulation of these draft guidelines for feedback and comments.

4. Meetings with local communities and other actors at some of the potential sites (The facilitators of the local
meetings shall ideally have participated in the core group’s preliminary meeting).

5. Compilation of all comments and outcomes of local meetings by the core group

6. Final draft to be circulated again.

7. Finalisation of the guidelines.

Who could be part of the process of drafting the guidelines?

The Ministry of Environment and Forests, or a body like the Wildlife Institute of India (which has been mandated by
the National Wildlife Action Plan for this) needs to initiate the process with the involvement of local communities,
forest staff, line agencies, groups involved with social issues, conservationists and academicians.

What could the MoEF do to facilitate declaration of community reserves apart from drafting guidelines
under the Act?
Prior to declaration of Community Reserves, it would be useful if the MoEF:
A. Carries out or commissions an exercise for gaining a better understanding of existing CCAs through:

• Documentation of Community Conservation Sites across the country (the Kalpavriksh Directory of CCAs, in final
stage of preparation, could be a base document for this),
806 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

• Carrying out initial inventories and mapping at national and sub-national levels,

• Identifying key communities and community representatives managing CCAs,

• Identifying broad bio-geographic and bio-cultural coverage of CCAs,

• Tracing the historical context of CCAs (including traditional land/water use systems, relationship of such systems
to pre-State and State regimes, including customary tenurial regimes, traditions of conservation and sustainable
use, indigenous knowledge, etc…and their current status),

• Identifying community views on the pros and cons of the existing legal provisions and the modifications they would
like in these for providing clearer incentives.
B. Announces the legal provisions available for support in national, regional and local media along with
other appropriate means inviting applications/queries from interested parties.

2. Framework for guidelines on community reserves

(Note: this is a very tentative, suggested framework for the proposed guidelines on Community Reserves. It needs
widespread discussion and revisions, and is being put out here only for the purpose of stimulating discussion and
further development).

Process of declaration of a Community Reserve

1. Widespread dissemination of information among relevant communities, regarding the provision of Community
Reserve, through locally appropriate means. These could include local language newspapers, radio, holding
meetings with the communities, others.

2. Inviting interested communities/individuals to apply for declaration of their area as a Community Reserve .
Each application should specify whether an existing institution is already in place and, if yes, its structure,
representativeness, gender balance, decision making processes, functioning, rules and regulations (including
whether written or unwritten) etc. Where there is no existing institution, how they propose to develop one and the
nature of facilitative and other support expected from the govt/others in management of the CR. In the case of a
community, a gram sabha resolution in which at least 30% men and women of different socio-economic groups
participated in support of the application should be attached.

3. Application to be reviewed by relevant official agency, and decision to accept or reject it taken within a period
of 3 months; process of review to involve local/national NGOs, other experts, with full chance given to applying
community/individual and their interested neighbours to make their case and get their doubts/fears clarified. The
proposal should also be publicised in neighbouring right holding/user communities to invite their objections if any
(as done while forming Van Panchayats) to prevent future conflicts.

4. If tentatively accepted by the reviewing agency then preliminary notification to be issued specifying the boundaries
of the Community Reserve (this will require surveying and mapping) and published in the local media inviting
objections from other interested parties; if rejected, reasons for this to be conveyed in local languages to applying
community/individual.

5. After the declaration of intention, a team would be constituted by the community and/or outside agency for
initiating studies to gain a clearer understanding of the CR. The team would include:

a. Knowledgeable women & men representing all socio-economic groups of the proposing community, chosen
by the gram sabha (A modified process will be required for land/water owned by an individual or a small
group )

b. One or more NGOs/institutes focusing on ecological/conservation research.

c. One or more NGOs/institutes working on social (gender, livelihood, etc) issues.

d. Research wing of the forest department or other relevant department (where appropriate and possible).

6. The above team will initiate a study in consultation with and with full participation of the applying or relevant
community(ies) on the following aspects (possibly using PBR as a tool, and participatory mapping):

a. History of land/water ownership/rights, including CPRs, administrative control, and land and resource use.

b. Current status of land ownership, tenurial status of and access/rights to CPRs, disputed claims over
land/forests, if any, land and resource use pattern (including biodiversity-based livelihoods), legal and
administrative control, rights and responsibilities.

c. Community composition, character, socio-economic and gender differentiated dependence on the resources,
socio-economic and demographic profile, and so on.

d. Existing institutions, their characteristics, rules and regulations governing natural resources, women and
the deprived’s access to decision making.

e. Ecological profile of the area, critical wildlife/biodiversity (including agrobiodiversity) values, and threats
and pressures to the biological diversity, if any.

f. Assessment of community’s aspirations from the area.

7. Submission of the results of the studies (in local languages) to the community and to relevant official agencies.
 Annexures 807

8. Review by the concerned agency within a period of 3 months.

9. If accepted, final notification and announcement of the same in most appropriate local medium as well as at the
state level.

Process of nurturing democratic and equitable institutions

10. Based on the findings of the study mentioned above the concerned official agency would initiate discussions
with the proposing community/individual about accepting the existing institutions, strengthening the existing
institutions or establishing new institutions for the purpose of management of the Community Reserve. Discussions
could also focus on the smallest unit of decision-making, whether a community needs one single institution or in
case of a large area many small units which will manage areas falling under their jurisdiction. The local institution
must ensure:

a. All adult members of the community, including women, SCs, STs, the landless, and other disprivileged
sections, have a right to participate in gram sabha decision-making.

b. All managing committees will be gender balanced and ensure proportional representation to all existing
socio-economic and ethnic groups.

Preparation of the management plan

11. The community with support from the study support group mentioned in point 5 above or otherwise will prepare
a management plan for the CR, which would involve the following:

a. Total area under the CR

b. Objectives for which conserved

c. History of the area, and current status of usage, rights and responsibilities

d. Zoning, if any

e. Institutions established:

i. Composition of the institution/s

ii. Relationship with other institutions in place, if any

iii. Quorum for the meetings

iv. Efforts taken to adequately represent all sections of the community

v. Frequency of meetings

vi. Functioning of the institution

f. Status of wildlife, and other floral/faunal biodiversity, including agro-diversity, in the CR

g. Status of natural resources and dependence of the community on those

h. The resource requirement of the community

i. Rules and regulations established for management of the CR, including customary rules that are being
carried forward

j. Systems of fines and punishments, or incentives, established.

k. Prescriptions for conservation and management, including for wildlife conservation, livelihood security,
maintaining or enhancing ecosystem services, and so on.

Process of interaction of the community institutions with district or state level institutions

12. Representatives from the smallest decision-making body, preferably selected unanimously, will be a part of the
district level institution concerned with the CR (this needs further discussions with the groups and communities).
This representation should be for a specified period of time. If the concerned community wants to change the
representative before the specified period of time then a resolution would have to be adopted with 80% majority
at the local institution when the issue was discussed with not less than the quorum of the institution and where
all sections of the society were adequately represented.
Possibilities of CR forums or federations at village cluster/tehsil/district or other larger levels, interlinked with
PRIs, other governance institutions, need to be explored.

13. Each Community Reserve must have a mechanism for sharing information

a. It would be the responsibility of each government department/private establishment/NGO concerned/

individuals to inform the local community about any proposed activity (within the CR and around 10km of
the CR, or any other activity outside this area that could have a significant bearing on the CR. It should
808 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

then be mandatory for the government to seek the permission of the concerned gram sabha(s) for such
activity. In the long-run, mandatory guidelines/norms for development projects and commercial activities
in areas around CRs, which must be followed by all govt. departments, need to be formulated.. The
proposing agency should keep minutes of the meeting where such discussions were held, along with the
time, date and place of the meeting, number of community members present, and names and signatures
of those present, including community members and others (this should correspond to the minutes of the
meetings taken down by the community). This should also specify the time and date fixed up with the
community for further discussions on the matter, if required.

b. The community should be encouraged or supported to establish study circles constituting of members
interested in the issues of natural resource management (and involving outside experts at the invitation
of the community). The study circles could be forums for discussion on a number of issues to facilitate
informed decisions, but will not be a decision-making body. The composition of the study circle will be
decided by the concerned community.

Process of monitoring and evaluation

14. Each Community Reserve will establish a monitoring and evaluation body (the above-mentioned study circles
could also take on this function). The nature of this body will evolve through discussions with the community.
This body could be the same as the village institution for regular monitoring. An institution similar in nature to
that mentioned in point 5 above could be established to externally evaluate the ecological and social impacts of
the CR periodically. This team (either on its own or with help from other organisations) with the participation of
the concerned community will develop tools for self-monitoring as also the external evaluation of the CR.

15. The relevant documents including management plan, should also specify all the other institutions existing
within the community having a bearing on natural resources in the area and the relationship between all these
institutions. For example, the mahila mangal dals, the youth clubs, etc.

16. At regular intervals (time period to be specified), a full meeting of the concerned community, the groups/
institutions involved with monitoring and evaluation, concerned government agencies, other relevant actors will
be organised to:

a. Discuss the results of the monitoring and evaluations and work on future steps to be followed

b. To evaluate constraints faced by the community while managing the CR

c. To review the composition and functioning of the decision-making body

d. To review the functioning of the support structures to the community

e. To approve the management plan for next specified period.

Endnotes
1
This draft was prepared by Neema Pathak, with inputs from Madhu Sarin and Ashish Kothari, in 2004. This draft
was subsequently sent to the Ministry of Envionment and Forests and through them to the Chief Wildlife Wardens of
all states. Contact: Kalpavriksh, Apt. no. 5, Shri Dutta Krupa, 908 Deccan Gymkhana, Pune 411004. Ph: 5654239.
E-mail: neema.pb@gmail.com
2
Both Punjab and Haryana State governments have declared a wildlife sanctuary each in parts of this area. Although
officially declared Wild Life Sanctuaries, protection of wild life in them, particularly blackbuck, has been done by the
Bishnois as a part of their tradition. The Supreme Court order of 1998 requiring time bound settlement of rights
and issuing final notifications brought the legal contradiction of declaring these areas WLSs to the surface. Haryana
Wild Life Department has submitted an affidavit to the SC that no rights can be settled as all the land belongs to
the villagers. Consequently it has sought permission to denotify the Abubshahar WLS. After denotification it plans
to convert it into a CR but the modalities are yet to be worked out. Punjab govt, on the other hand, on the advice of
the ex-director of WII Mr Mukherjee, got the Collector to admit people’s rights under section 26A and issued the final
notification of the WLS in Abohar. Here, progressive reduction in the size of land holdings is leading to increasing
conflicts between even the Bishnois and the blackbuck. Although they are not harmed, people try to shoo them away
from their fields to protect crops. Promotion of kinnoo cultivation by the horticulture department has also eaten into
the habitat of the blackbucks.
Annexure 6: Communities do conserve!
Statement of the National Workshop on Community Conserved Biodiverse Areas
(21st-23rd November 2001)

Participants at the National Workshop on Community Conserved Biodiverse Areas, held at Bhopal on 21-23rd
November 2001, concluded that communities have been the strongest force in the conservation of biodiversity in
several areas. However, enabling conditions and support are required in many such areas and in order to promote
Community Conserved Biodiverse Areas (CCAs) in other parts of India. This conclusion was based on a series
of case studies and state overviews of the very many examples of ecosystems and species being protected and
conserved by communities across India. These examples are collectively called Community Conserved Biodiverse
Areas. The definition of CCAs put forward by the organizers was:
Natural ecosystems (including those with minimum to substantial human influence) containing substantial wild
and domesticated biodiversity value, being conserved or protected by local communities for various reasons. The
bottom line being that the major players in decision making are the local communities and the efforts lead to the
conservation of biodiversity. CCAs could include areas such as:
Village forests and pastures conserved to meet livelihood or other requirements; Van panchayats of Uttaranchal,
betta land of Karnataka and others; Joint Forest Management (JFM); Areas conserved for their cultural/religious
significance;
Wetlands conserved for drinking or irrigation facilities; Traditional agricultural systems with diverse agricultural
niches; Watershed conservation; Coastal areas protected for traditional fisheries or for other reasons; and so on.

The main features of the workshop were as follows:

• It was organised by Kalpavriksh - Environmental Action Group, Indian Institute of Forest Management, Winrock
International India, and Indian Social Institute;

• It was attended by over 90 people, including, NGOs, village representatives, forest and other government
officers, scientists and academics, activists, and students. Many of the participants were from CCAs, or had
worked with or studied such areas. The Chief Wildlife Wardens of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, and
representatives of the Ministry of Environment and Forests , were also present;

• Participants came from over 15 states of India;

• Presentations were made on CCA overviews from over a dozen states, on individual CCA cases from several parts
of India, and on legal, social, economic, and ecological issues related to such areas;

• Three statements were signed by the participants in support of:

- The demand to continue the control of fishing in the Tawa Reservoir (Madhya Pradesh) by the community
organisation Tawa Matsya Sangh

- The struggle against sand mining at Kolavipalam, as described below

- The protest against mining at Kataldi and Nagni, Tehri Garhwal district, Uttaranchal, in areas protected by
the community

Community Conserved Areas: Some Examples

CCAs were defined as areas with significant biodiversity, which are being conserved by or with the substantial
involvement of communities. Some of the examples that were highlighted were:

• Protection of 1800 hectares of forest by Mendha (Lekha) village in Gadchiroli district, Maharashtra, by Gond tribal
community;

• Regeneration and protection of 600-700 hectares of forest by Jardhargaon village in Uttaranchal state;

• Protection of sea turtle eggs, hatchlings, and the nesting sites by a fisher folk community NGO in Kolavipalam,
Kerala;

• Traditional conservation of Painted Stork and globally threatened Spot-billed Pelican nesting sites by villagers in
Kokkare Bellur village, Karnataka;

• Religious protection to the endangered Blacknecked crane in Sangti Valley, Arunachal Pradesh by Buddhist
communities;

• Conservation of Gursikaran and Sheikha wetlands in Uttar Pradesh by surrounding villagers;

• Community-based monitoring and enterprise for Non Timber Forest Produce (NTFP) by the Soliga tribals at the
Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple Sanctuary, Karnataka;

809
810 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

• Community forestry initiatives in several thousand villages of Orissa;

• 600 ha. of regenerated village forest in the Loktak Lake catchment by Ronmei tribe in Tokpa Kabui village,
Churachandpur district, Manipur;

• Orans in the desert region of Rajasthan including Barmer district, by the local community.
There are also several examples of CCAs, including those initiated by official agencies such as at Kalakkad
Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (Tamil Nadu), Periyar Tiger Reserve (Kerala), and Khangchendzonga valley (Sikkim).
Representatives from these areas were invited but could not come.

Significant benefits of CCAs are:

• Enhanced ecosystem services and goods, including water;

• Increased wildlife populations and habitat protection;

• Enhanced livelihood security and revenue for communities;

• Increased social respect and self esteem;

• Protection or revival of social and cultural values, and of traditional knowledge and management systems;

• Greater political empowerment, village cohesiveness and unity;

• Complementary role to officially protected areas;

Some Major Issues Emerging

1. Centralised, uniform models of development and conservation have undermined the diverse, site-specific
traditions and initiatives by communities;

2. There is very inadequate understanding and recognition of CCA initiatives, and of their beneficial impacts to
biodiversity, livelihoods, and social security;

3. Absence of decision-making powers with communities, and legal backing to CCAs, have hampered the
initiatives;

4. Insecurity of tenure and control over natural resources, on which communities depend, have also hampered
their initiatives;

5. Outside agencies have a role to play in CCAs, but very often bring in inappropriate (including financial)
interventions that undermine the sustainability of these initiatives;

6. Many donor-driven or official initiatives towards community participation in conservation have failed due to
lack of transparency and accountability, inadequate transfer of powers and capacity, and lack of involvement of
communities from the planning stage;

7. Complex and unclear legal status of lands and resources, and a plethora of institutions and schemes, creates
hurdles for CCA initiatives;

8. There are often serious inequities within communities, including between men and women, and different classes
and castes, which undermine CCA initiatives and sustainability, or deny the benefits of such initiatives to
disadvantaged sections;

9. Erosion of traditional CCAs and related institutions in many parts of India;

10. In some CCAs, habitat conservation has led to increase in wild animal populations. This in turn sometimes leads
to property and life damage to the conserving communities;

11. CCAs often derive strength from the large number of people’s movements across the country, specially to resist
destructive commercial and developmental pressures;

12. CCAs face serious threats from the larger context within which they are placed, such as, party politics,
centralised control over natural resources, national and global markets, privatisation of common property
resources, mass tourism, insensitivity of decision makers, inappropriate education, consumerist lifestyles, and
population dynamics.

13. Clear and secure tenure rights to land and other natural resources ensure a stake in conservation. CCAs work
better where either de jure or de facto security of tenure exists;

Recommendations
Community conserved areas need to be given much broader recognition and support throughout the country. This
 Annexures 811

could be through documentation, legal backing, institutional support, and enabling conditions to secure the rights
of communities to the resources they depend on and are conserving. In doing so, the tremendous diversity of
approaches that communities have evolved, needs to be respected and supported.
Specifically, the following recommendations were made:

1. CCAs need to be better understood and documented, clearly demarcated, and highlighted at all levels including
the mass media (but keeping in mind the need for communities to have the capacity to deal with issues such as
tourists and researchers descending on them);

2. Ecological, social and economic impacts of CCAs need to be assessed at local, regional and national levels;

3. Simple monitoring and assessment techniques need to be developed which will include community perspectives
and parameters;

4. Existing community institutions, practices and knowledge systems, should be recognised and built on, and
where necessary modified based on lessons being learnt, rather than displaced by, new institutions as part of
development and conservation programmes; efforts involved in organising community institutions should be
simple and practical;

5. The great diversity of community institutions and approaches should be respected and strengthened, including
neglected ones such as taungya villages;

6. Conservation and development initiatives should be seen as long term, dynamic processes rather than short
term, target oriented projects;

7. Such initiatives must provide special opportunities to disprivileged sections (women, landless, tribals, children,
aged, disabled), including separate forums where appropriate;

8. Forums for dialogues and conflict resolution involving all stakeholders need to be created;

9. As and when required, funds should be locally or regionally generated (including through NTFP policy reforms
and other measures) and managed by the CCA institutions for conservation and development of the area;

10. CCAs need to be given legal sanctity and local institutions need to be legally empowered. Given the diversity
of CCAs, a range of existing legal and policy spaces could to be used (including for the development of
appropriate guidelines and rules), such as:

•Village Forests in Indian Forest Act 1927

•Van Panchayat Rules

•Ecologically Sensitive Areas in Environment (Protection) Act 1986

•Coastal Regulation Zone Notification in Environment (Protection) Act 1986

•Gramdan Act

•Panchayat Extension to Scheduled Areas Act

•Honorary Wildlife Wardens under Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972

•Existing State Legislations such as Anchal Forest Rules in Arunachal Pradesh

11. Given that the above might not be adequate to cover the full range of CCAs (marine and fresh water habitats,
village lands), new provisions need to be explored of, such as:

•Heritage Sites in the proposed Biodiversity Bill

•Community Reserves in the proposed amendment to the Wildlife Protection Act 1972

•Separate State Acts for CCAs

12. Relevant laws and policies need to be made accessible in simple and local languages;

13. Citizens must have a full right to information including through efficient and locally accessible modes of
dissemination;

14. Political parties, armed forces, donor agencies, media and decision makers need to be sensitised to CCA issues.
Urban citizens need to be sensitized to the destructive impacts of their consumerist lifestyles;

15. The increasing market for natural products (bamboo, medicinal plants, fish, honey) can be constructively used
to promote CCAs;

16. Local tourism must be managed by local communities with sensitivity towards conservation and cultural
dimensions;

17. The conservation and development planning and administrative process needs to be decentralised to local
812 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

levels, with the government providing a facilitatory role;

18. Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) procedures need to integrate CCA issues including mandatory
provisions for involvement of local people in data generation and impact assessment, transparency in decisions
and results generated, as also public hearings when sought by the community;

19. All new policy initiatives including the 10th Five Year Plan should integrate CCA as a strategy;

20. Success stories of CCAs need to be incorporated into the curriculum of all education and training institutions,
especially NRM focussed;

21. Community members and institutions need to be helped in improving their capacity to handle the complex
issues facing CCAs;

22. CCAs within official protected areas, wherever they exist, also need to be identified, recognized, and built upon
to achieve a just and effective conservation strategy.

Follow Up Suggested
The participants decided to set up an informal network to further the above recommendations, which will take up
the following activities:

1. Documentation and highlighting of CCA initiatives across the country, including developing formats and manuals
for the same;

2. Exchange and dissemination of information amongst various sections of society;

3. Training of CCA participants and facilitating agencies, on research and documentation, and legal and policy
issues relating to CCAs;

4. Creating a central database on CCAs, relevant materials, human resources, policies and laws, and funding
sources;

5. Legal and policy advocacy to strengthen the enabling environment for CCAs, including through the development
of detailed guidelines for various laws and holding workshops;

6. Facilitating exchange visits and workshops of community members, to enable sharing of experiences;

7. Integration of CCA issues and experiences into the training curricula of all institutions dealing with natural
resources, such as forestry training institutes;

8. Integration of CCA issues and experiences into existing networks and forums;

9. Overall advocacy and campaign support, to strengthen CCAs, respond to threats, and in general spread their
reach.

(For more details and any comments, pl. contact: Neema Pathak, Kalpavriksh, Apt. 5 Shree Datta Krupa, 908
Deccan Gymkhana, Pune 411004, India. Tel/fax: 91-20-25654239; Email: neema.pb@gmail.com
Annexure 7: Some other Kalpavriksh and
TILCEPA publications on Community Conserved
Areas (2001 till 2006) and relevant international
websites
1. Neema Pathak: Kumaon- A Question Of Equity. Hindu Survey of the Environment. June 2001.

2. Neema Pathak. Legal Spaces for Community Conserved Areas in India. RUPFOR Magazine (MoEF cell on JFM).
Jan 2002.

3. Neema Pathak. Implications of Existing and Potential Laws and Policies for Community Forestry Initiatives in
India. INFORM – Winrock International-India Newsletter.

4. Roshni Kutty. Kerala’s Sacred Groves-A Ray Of Hope. Hindu Survey of the Environment. June 2001.

5. Roshni Kutty. Conflict between a local sea turtle conservation group and a sand mining community at
Kottapuzha estuary, Kozhikode, Kerala. Kachhapa newsletter. Issue No 5.

6. Roshni Kutty. Reviving the Sacred - A conservation Effort in Kerala. Hindu Survey of Environment. June 2001.

7.. Ashish Kothari. Ek Kahani Jungle aur Beej Bachane Ki (Hindi) in several newspapers, May 2002

8. Manju Menon. Saved, The Story of Rathong Chu, Ecologist Asia Vol. 11, No. 1, January-March 2003

9. Neema Pathak. Communities do conserve! Policy Matters, Issue 10, a journal of the IUCN Commission on
Environmental, Economic and Social Policy, August 2002

10. Neema Pathak, My Bellure….Kokare Bellure…Chandamama

Bellure…Chandamama (English) January 2003.

11. Neema Pathak and Ashish Kothari. 2003. Community-Conserved Biodiverse Areas: Lessons from South Asia.
In D. Harmon and A.D. Putney (eds), The Full Value of Parks: From Economics to the Intangible. Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers, Oxford.

12. Neema Pathak, and Seema Bhatt. 2003. Forest Management: Colonised by Brethren. The Hindu Survey of the
Environment 2003.
2003.

13. Marcus Colchester, Tejaswini Apte, Michel Laforge and Neema Pathak. 2003. Bridging the Gap: Communities,
Forests and International Networks.
Networks. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 41. Centre for International Forestry Research.
Indonesia.

14. Neema Pathak , Seema Bhatt, Tasneem Huzefa and Ashish Kothari. Community Conserved Areas: A Bold
Frontier for Conservation. Briefing Note No. 3 for the Convention on Biological Diversity. IUCN Theme on
Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities, Equity and Protected Areas.

15. Neema Pathak. 2004. Towards Best Practices, in Depth: Village Mendha-Lekha, Maharashtra, India. Towards
Better Practice in Protected Areas and Technology Transfer.
Transfer. Presented at the Seventh Conference of Parties.
United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

16. Neema Pathak and Ashish Kothari. 2003. Community Conserved Biodiverse Areas: Lessons from South Asia. In
David Harmon and Allen Putney (eds.), The Full Value of Parks: From Economic to the Intangible.
Intangible. Rowman and
Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

17. Neema Pathak, Ashish Kothari, and Shantha Bhushan. 2004. Involving Communities in Conservation: A Lost
Opportunity.www.hindustantimes.com/citizensnews..
Opportunity.

18. Neema Pathak. 2003. Community Conserved Areas Implications of Existing and Proposed Laws and Policies on
Community Conserved Areas in India. Paper sent for a meeting on Participatory Approaches for Conservation by
the Government of Bhutan in November 2003.

19. Kothari Ashish and Pathak Neema, ‘Can communities protect Important Bird Areas?’ In Islam, M.Z. and
Rahmani, A.R. 2004. Important Bird Areas in India: Priority Sites for Conservation. Indian Bird Conservation
Network:Bombay Natural History Society and Birdlife International (UK), Mumbai

20. Kothari Ashish, ‘Community-oriented conservation legislation in South Asia: Halting

progress’ In Sharma, Uday R. and Yonzon, Pralad B. (eds). 2005. People and Protected Areas in South Asia.
IUCN South Asia and Resources Himalaya Foundation, Kathmandu

21. Kohli Kanchi, ‘Destination Siroy’, www.indiatogether.org; September 2004

22. The Khonoma magic. The Hindu Survey of the Environment 2005.

23. Dangeheri: Women Power. The Hindu Survey of Environment 2005. Appiko Movement in Uttarakannada,
Maharashtra Herald, 25th June 2005 Kothari, A. and Pathak, N. 2005. Community conservation. Indian Express,
May 8, 2005.

24. Barrow, E. and Pathak, N.. 2005. Conserving “Unprotected” Protected Areas – Communities Can and Do
Conserve Landscapes of all Sorts. In Brown, Jessica, Mitchell, Nora and Beresford, Michael (eds.) 2005.

813
814 Directory of Community Conserved Areas in India

The Protected Landscape Approach: Linking Nature, Culture and Community. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge, UK.

25. Kothari, A. and Pathak, N. 2006. Protected Areas, Community Based Conservation and Decentralisation:
Lessons from India. A report prepared for the Ecosystems, Protected Areas, and People Project (EPP) of the
IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas.

26. Pathak, N. and Kothari, A. 2005. Satara Tukum: Return of the Forest. The Hindu Survey of the Environment
2005.

27. Pathak, N and Kothari A. 2005. Is the Tribal Rights Bill Anti-Wildlife? Sanctuary Asia. Vol.XXV.No.3, June 2005.

28. Pathak, N., Kothari, A., and Roe, Dilys. 2005. Conservation with social justice: The role of community
conserved areas in achieving the Millennium Development Goals. In David Satterthwaite and Tom Bigg (eds).,
How to Make Poverty History: The Central Role of Local Organisations in Meeting the MDGs, International
Institute of Environment and Development, London.

29. Kothari, A. 2006. Conservation goes back to its roots. BBC News Green Room. 14 July 2006. http://news.bbc.
co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5083558.stm

30. Kothari, A. and Pathak, N. 2006. Protected Areas, Community Based Conservation and Decentralisation:
Lessons from India. Report prepared for the Ecosystems, Protected Areas, and People Project (EPP) of the IUCN
World Commission on Protected Areas (through the IUCN Regional Protected Areas Programme, Asia).

31. Kothari, A. and Pathak, N. 2006. Tigers, people and participation: Where conservation and livelihoods go hand
in hand. Policy Matters 14, March 2006.

32. Kothari, A. and Pathak, N. (2006). Tigers, People and Participation – Where Conservation and Livelihoods go
Hand in Hand. Policy Matters, 14th March 2006. CENESTA, Iran.

33. Pathak, N. and Kothari, A. 2006. Where blackbucks roam, turtles breed and birds fear no more. (on CCAs in
Orissa). Hornbill, Jan-March 2006.

34. Pathak, N., Kothari, A., Misra, S., and Rao, G. 2006. Community conservation: survival against all odds. (on
CCAs in Orissa). The Hindu Survey of the Environment 2006.

35. Pathak, N. and Kothari, A. Where Backbucks Roam, Turtles Breed and Birds Fear No More. Hornbill, Jan-March
2006. Bombay Natural History Society, Mumbai.

36. Pathak, N., Kothari, A., Misra, S., and Rao, G. Community Conservation-Survival against all odds. The Hindu
Survey of Environment 2006 Kothari, A. and Pathak, N. 2006. Birds and People: A Traditional Association.
Hornbill, April-June 2006.

37. Pathak, N., Balasinorwala, T., Kothari, A., and Bushley, B.R. People in Conservation: Community Conserved
Areas in India. Kalpavriksh, Pune/Delhi. (Brochure)

38. Pathak, N. 2006. Community Conserved Areas in South Asia. In Parks: Community Conserved Areas. Vol 16 No
1, 2006. IUCN-The World Conservation Union, Switzerland.

39. CCA Briefing Note: http://www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/Wkg_grp/TILCEPA/CCA%20Briefing%20Note.pdf

40. Governance Briefing Note:

http://www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/Wkg_grp/TILCEPA/briefing%20notes%20on%20governance%20of%20PAs.
pdf

41. WAMIP briefing note

http://www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/WAMIP/WAMIP%20Briefing%20Notes%20Fall%202004.pdf

42. Indigenous and Local Communities and Protected Areas- Towards Equity and Enhanced Conservation. Guidance
on policy and practice for Co-managed Protected Areas and Community Conserved Areas
http://www.iucn.org/bookstore/HTML-books/BP11-indigenous_and_local_communities/cover.html

43. PARKS 13.1 on conservation partnerships in Africa http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/parks_13_1.pdf

44. PARKS 12.2 on Local communities and protected areas, http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/parks12_2.pdf

45. Participatory Conservation: Paradigm Shifts in International Policy. IUCN/TILCEPA/Kalpavriksh, Pune, 2004.
http://www.kalpavriksh.org/f5/f5.1/pubcbc

46. Community Conserved Areas and National Legislation http://www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/CCAlegislations.htm

47. Policy Matters No. 13, Special issue on History, Culture & Conservation,. http://www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/
Publications/Publications.htm#pm13

48. Policy Matters No. 12 Special issue on Community Empowerment for Conservation http://www.iucn.org/
themes/ceesp/Publications/newsletter/PM12.pdf

49. Handbook on governance of protected areas

http://www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/Wkg_grp/CMWG/EVALUATING%20GOVERNANCE%20HANDBOOK.doc

50. Publication of the special issue of PARKS 16.1, on community conserved areas http://cmsdata.iucn.org/
downloads/parks_16_1_forweb.pdf