A network for all who care about the conservation of our world and who want to see it achieved with justice, compassion, dignity and honesty.

Indigenous Rights Versus Wildlife Rights?

In Southern India, tribes-people and wildlife defenders are locked in a battle of indigenous peoples’ rights versus wildlife rights.

Last month the tribe secured access to 60 percent of the forest that they claim is their ‘birthright’ and rejected a relocation package outside the tiger reserve, which is situated at the confluence of the Eastern and Western Ghats in Chamrajnagar district in India’s southern state of Karnataka.

Part 1

by Malini Shankar

BANGALORE, Jan 13, 2012 (IPS) - Tucked away in a dense and ecologically diverse tiger reserve in Southern India, tribes-people and wildlife defenders are locked in a battle of indigenous peoples’ rights versus wildlife rights.

Earlier this year the Soligas – a tribe hailing from the Billigiri Ranga Temple Hills tiger reserve (BRT) – won the rights to their ancestral land, following a thorny legal encounter with the state forest department, which had earlier threatened to displace 1,500 indigenous families in order to protect 30 endangered tigers.

Tribal representatives insist that the Soligas’ presence on the reserve is not detrimental to the tigers, claiming back in December, "We have been the ones who looked out for the tigers. Give us poison rather than move us from our home."

Last month the tribe secured access to 60 percent of the forest that they claim is their ‘birthright’ and rejected a relocation package outside the tiger reserve, which is situated at the confluence of the Eastern and Western Ghats in Chamrajnagar district in India’s southern state of Karnataka.

A press release by the UK-based tribal advocacy group Survival International said last year, "This unprecedented move brings an end to (the tribe’s) fears of eviction and the ban on their right to hunt and cultivate."

But wildlife conservationists across India are deeply alarmed by the tribe’s decision to stay in the BRT, since it does not appear to take into account the irreversible impact of human settlement on wildlife populations and complex ecologies.

Many experts believe that continued human presence in the small, bio-diverse forest could be detrimental to the wildlife, particularly pyramid species like tigers.

The BRT was officially declared a protected reserve last year, when scientists discovered it was home to a huge variety of wildlife including endangered tigers, leopards, elephants, wild dogs, bears, 270 species of endemic birds, scores of snake varieties and other reptiles, as well as turtles and monitor lizards, all in a 541 square kilometre forest.

Anthropologists say this dense concentration of wildlife is already a strain on nature’s ability to provide adequately for all the forest’s dwellers. Add to this a human settlement that relies heavily on forest produce for its survival and the situation bodes badly for the wildlife.

The Soligas are considered by many to be to be an environmentally "low impact" group. They worship a 1000-year-old tree as their supreme deity and have, for centuries, lived as one with the forest.

"The Soligas’ traditional health care system is holistic, [relying on] herbal remedies. Their customary diet includes millet, pulses and 20 varieties of leafy vegetables found in the forest," said H. Sudarshan of the tribal advocacy NGO Vivekananda Girijan Kalyan Kendra (VGKK).

However, the Soligas’ transition from a subsistence community into increased participation in the formal market economy through trade in forest products has increased their environmental impact on the reserve.

"Excluding firewood extraction, trade and consumption of minor forest produce (like herbs, roots, tubers, barks and mosses) account for 60 percent of their total cash income; they supplement their incomes by working as daily wage labourers with either the forest department or with the forest fringe coffee estates," Siddappa Shetty, a senior fellow at the Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment in the BRT, told IPS.

"Granting land and community rights within Protected Areas – which [comprise] less than four percent of India’s landscape – to growing populations of forest dwellers engaged in raising crops and livestock and commercial collection of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) for markets is a retrograde step," Praveen Bhargav of the Bangalore-based Wildlife First, added.

"Since India’s independence, vast areas of wildlife habitats under the control of local communities have been decimated. While the consequences of mining, dams and wildlife resorts are clearly visible, the destruction caused by millions of people extracting forest products remains largely unseen," he told IPS.

"Today, India’s Protected Areas are the last refuges where endangered species have a slim chance of survival. Rampant, market-driven exploitation of NTFPs in these ecologically sensitive hotspots could affect the delicate balance of nature," he said.

According to a recent study by Aditi Sinha and Kamaljit S. Bawa, researchers at the Department of Biology at the University of Massachusetts, "the Soligas" – meaning children of Bamboo – "harvest an average of 86 percent of the fruit yield per tree."

Quoting other scientific studies, Bhargav added, "Current harvesting techniques used by the Soligas have negative impacts on trees since they focus on maximizing economic returns by adopting methods of extraction like lopping branches and cutting trees. Such practices can ultimately decrease the rates at which trees grow, thereby making the extraction of Phyllanthus fruits unsustainable."

Given that at least eight varieties of birds, 100 species of insects, one leopard, one bear, a dozen Langur monkeys, a colony of 200 bats, a herd of 35 spotted deer and five snakes can dwell in and around a single tree in a tropical forest like the BRT, every tree culled by human beings contributes to the human-animal conflict for space.

Statistics from the Chamrajnagar Deputy Commissioner’s office revealed the tribal population to be 60,930 in 2001.

According to the Wildlife Institute of India (WII)’s most recent tiger census, the 541 square kilometre reserve was also home to 37 tigers in 2010. An average adult Royal Bengal Tiger needs at least 50 square kilometres of space, which means that the current terrain deficit for the endangered creatures is staggering.

"Tigers occupy areas where human impact is minimal; high tiger densities occur in areas with low human disturbances. When humans outnumber wildlife, the wildlife will not survive," Y.V. Jhala, head of the WII’s national tiger census, told IPS.

"While it is imperative that we redress injustices done to forest dwellers, it is vital that we do not simultaneously perpetuate injustices to wildlife, which are far more disenfranchised," Barghav told IPS.

Indigenous Rights Versus Wildlife Rights?

Part 2

By Malini Shankar

BANGALORE, Jan 14, 2012 (IPS) - As the amount of protected forest dwindles rapidly in India, indigenous groups and wildlife find themselves living cheek to jowl in an increasingly contested space.

The Billigiri Ranga Temple Hills tiger reserve (BRT) in the South Indian state of Karnataka has become the site at which impoverished tribes like the Soligas and endangered species such as tigers are scrabbling for survival in the tide of India’s rampant neoliberal development program that is throttling both the environment and indigenous peoples.

Though the Soligas have traditionally been a subsistence community, their newfound participation in the market economy has made them reliant on the trade of non-timber forest products (NTFPs), which is detrimental to the local ecology.

"The Soligas’ dependence on different types of spinach, lichens, mosses, honey, seeds, nuts, berries, yams, roots, tubers, and fruits have reduced drastically, as these products [no longer] generate a substantial income," Suresh Patil, deputy director of the Anthropological Survey of India, told IPS.

"Instead, they now prefer to work as daily wage labourers in the coffee and tea estates surrounding the forests," or engage in extracting and selling forest products.

In order to sustainably integrate tribes into the mainstream economy the government of India introduced Large Scale Adivasi Multi Purpose Societies (LAMPS), a scheme through which forest contractors buy forest produce from tribes under the supervision of forest officials.

These contractors would then supply the produce to large economic enterprises for the manufacture of cosmetics, herbal medicines, and pharmaceuticals.

This system has created a strain between tribes and the forests in which they live, leaving tribes aspiring for a higher standard of living but constantly unable to achieve it, given their battle for space with the wildlife.

The Central Tiger Task Force report ‘Joining the Dots’ claimed, "Villagers (in Karnataka) regard the tiger and the park administration as their common enemy number one. They live sandwiched between the two, and are bitter about their desperately wretched existence."

"Thousands of years ago humans could coexist with wildlife, for they took from forests only those resources needed for their basic survival. There were no linkages to the market then," Ullas Karanth, a biologist at the Wildlife Conservation Society, told IPS. Now, however, the Soligas’ use of cattle and wells – in their effort to generate more income and escape the throes of poverty – has ramped up the human- animal conflict in the already overcrowded reserve.

Tigers and leopards have begun to prey on cattle, causing great hardships for tribe members. Crop raiding elephants also threaten forest dwellers and squatters.

Human settlements in forests account for deforestation, rendering thousands of creatures homeless. Deforestation also traumatises migrating wildlife and separates individuals from the herd, which can lead to inbreeding.

Still, experts point out that the Soligas are only marginally responsible for deforestation when compared to the scale of deforestation perpetuated by the state forest department itself. Industrial farming in the BRT, including huge coffee estates owned by the biggest industrial houses in India, has seriously impinged on the protected land, pushing wildlife further into a concentrated space with tribes.

Following a lengthy lawsuit, which finally culminated this year in the Soligas winning access to 60 percent of the protected tiger reserve, conservationists fear that the tigers will bear the brunt of dwindling forest space.

The renowned tiger conservationist Valmik Thapar remarked famously, "[That] tigers and people are forced to co-exist, through some innovative scheme of increased use of underutilised forest resources involving the local people, does not make any sense to tiger conservationists, especially since human and cattle populations are constantly rising."

"Each tiger must eat 50 cow-sized animals a year to survive, and if you put [a hungry tiger] amidst cows and people, the conflict will be eternal. Tigers [have witnessed a decline of] over 95 percent of their former range in India."

"The premise of continued co-existence over vast landscapes where tigers thrive ecologically and people thrive economically is an impractical dream, with which I totally disagree. Such dreaming cannot save the tiger in the real world," he said.

"This scenario is a "no win" situation for everyone and [could] result in the eventual extinction of tiger populations Alternatives where tigers have priority inside identified protected reserves and people have priority outside them have to be explored fast and implemented expeditiously. There is no other way," Thapar concluded.

In 1998, when the Bhadra wildlife sanctuary was officially declared a protected tiger reserve, the government of Karnataka – assisted by a generous World Bank loan – earmarked a sizeable plot of land to create a township for relocated forest dwellers.

Indigenous groups living in the Bhadra sanctuary became the beneficiaries of a very sound relocation package. All the settlers were given ample arable land for cultivation, housing with sanitation, infrastructure for a sufficient power and water supply, agricultural produce markets, and facilities such as banks and schools and hospitals for both humans and livestock.

The Soligas have fiercely resisted a similar relocation package, claiming they would rather suffer death than be separated from their ancestral land.

However, conservationists are agreed on one thing: if the Soligas’ move to resist relocation is replicated in the future, habitat conservation could be futile. According to experts like Thapar, "The present concept of a ‘new’ coexistence [between tribes and tigers] is a utopian idea and will not work. This I am absolutely clear about."

*Malini Shankar is a wildlife photojournalist and filmmaker based in Bangalore

Part 1:

Part 2:

blog comments powered by Disqus