King’s Rule to Community Right

A HISTORICAL NOTE ABOUT THE FORESTS OF MAYURBHANJ

Deepak Pani

GENESIS OF A HISTORY

Mayurbhanj is a beautiful combination of plains, hills and mountains clothed with green and serene forests which human beings have inhabited for over fifty thousand years. This region is an adivasi heartland of eastern India, bordering Jharkhand and west Bengal, situated in the northern end of Odisha. Throughout the annals of Mayurbhanj history there is reference to forests; the forests have been a silent spectator in the rise and fall of Mayurbhanj since ages.. For the common man in Mayurbhanj forests are a symbol of reverence and awe and have the appeal of religious sanctity. The existing forests are still home to millions of trees, a wide variety of animals, streams and rivers, hills and valleys, ravines and waterfalls.

A single dynasty ruled Mayurbhanj for more than a thousand years. After the demise of Maharaja Krushna Chandra Bhanjdeo in the year 1882, his son Sriram Chandra Bhanjdeo took the charge of the kingdom as a minor of 11 years. By this time the British Raj had strengthened its clutches over the Mayurbhanj Kingdom and, as part of the British Raj policy, the kingdom came under the court of wards with an Englishman, P. Wylly, directly monitoring Sriram Chandra’s day to day rule until he took full control in 1890. Sriram Chandra was the brightest among the rulers of Mayurbhanj; he was a benevolent king, very popular among his subjects not only in Mayurbhanj but across Odisha. His role in formation of Odisha state was a milestone achievement.

Originally Mayurbhanj was found by the East- India company and termed a “Jungle Mahal” meaning that the area was predominantly forested. Yet no revenue was being derived from the forests and the tenants were free to use forest products the way they wished. In the year 1894 the then British India Govt. circulated a direction for Forest Rule formation in the state, perhaps insisting that the Mayurbhanj Kingdom establish a separate Forest Department in 1895. Before this there were no forest acts in force nor was there any separate department. During the next 40 years, the reforms in the forest administration were introduced; the Indian Forest Act (1927) was introduced, along with a set of rules entitled “the Mayurbhanj Forest Manual” was framed in pursuance of the Act. In 1904 the meter gauge rail line was constructed which in 1920 was extended to the interior forests area to transport timber and other forest products; an agreement was made with M/s B.Borooha & Company in 1919 for a supply of timber from Similipal and adjoining forests for 30 years. Monopolies were given for collection and export of some minor forest products like tassar, hives, charcoals, sabai grass, Nux vomica (Kochilakhai) and myrobolans. Experiments were undertaken to establish plantations of teak, sisam, Mahogany, eucalyptus, Indian rubber, sandalwood, pine, tea,etc. Quarries of potstones were leased out; ivory was sold and kendu leaves were exported, and grazing was free in the plain reserves for the tenants’ cattle. In Protected Forests, the tenants could harvest unreserved species up to 4 feet girth and over on payments of concession royalty. According to Rule 62 of the Mayurbhanj Forest Manual, bonafide residents of Mayurbhanj were allowed to collect or gather all edible roots, flowers, fruits leaves and other minor forest produce free of charges for their own use.

Rule 68 of the Mayurbhanj Forest Manual provided that in lieu of the various concessions granted to the bonafide residents of Mayurbhanj, they had to help in detection of crime and in the apprehension of offenders; they also had to help the officials in preventing and extinguishing forest fires. Furthermore, under the Rule 89 para VI, the villagers who lived adjacent to the forests and received better facilities and concessions, were to help the forest officials in surveys and demarcations; failure to comply with these provisions led to temporary withdrawal of concessions.

POST INDEPENDENCE FOREST MANAGEMENT

The state became Mayurbhanj district as per erstwhile princely state. In 1949, the forests of Mayurbanj came under the control of the Odisha Forest Department; 44% of the total 10416 sq.km of Mayurbhanj area was under good forest cover.

Towards the end of 1950s the concern for conservation and wildlife protection instigated the creation of a separate National Park in 1957. In India, subsequently the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 made it mandatory for the creation of three categories of protected areas: National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries and Closed Areas. To put a brake on the rapid destruction of wild life in India, Project Tiger was launched in 1973, based on the philosophy that tiger habitats threatened by human intrusion must be made inviolate. In 1973, the Similipal Reserve Forest was brought under “Project Tiger” and declared 2750 sq. kms. as Similipal Tiger Reserve; in 1979, 2200 sq. kms. was declared as the Similipal Sanctuary and subsequently the government of Odisha created a National Park within the Sanctuary covering an area of 303 sq. km, and later extended to 845.7 sq kms.

Illustrative and noticeable changes in forest cover and the forest administration were marked in the years between 1960-80. The management process took over the flourishing part of the forest as Protected Area. In 1980 Similipal Forest Development Corporation (SFDC) was created which maximized Minor Forest Produce collection and timber extraction in all but the core area. Thousands of local people were engaged in treefelling and earned additional incomes. Civil society objected to the tree felling which led to a ban recommended by the House Committee of Odisha Legislative Assembly. However, by then the SFDC had created a market for timber and established a value chain that continued even after its collapse. The mindset had already changed and a motivation for timber business, quite developed by the end of 1990s; the role of timber supply was taken over by a new mafia that used the same supply chain.

Similipal was declared as a Biosphere Reserve covering an area of 5578 sq. kms. by the government of India in 1994; UNESCO added Similipal to its list of Biosphere Reserves in May 2009. The conservation strategy adopted by the Protected Area managers deliberately ignored the local peoples’ relation with the forest, their dependency and rights. Ironically, thousands of adivasis depending on these forests for survival were left without bare necessities. As a result conflicts grew between local communities and forest officials; a situation came about where neither the Forest department nor the local communities were in a position to enjoy the forests.

The forest area of 1550 sq kms, beyond the Tiger Reserve and in control of the Territorial Forest Divisions and the government is not well protected. The dependency of the local communities combined with the ritual hunting causes a serious threat to the wildlife of Similipal. There is little serious dialogue between the various stakeholders – including the Forest Department, the NGOs, the local adivasi communities and the civil society – to mitigate these problems. As such, Similipal seems to be caught in a vicious status quo. In order toaddress this lack of dialogue, Gram Swaraj is facilitating a dialogue between all the stake holders to ensure the full involvement of the local communities of the region in the conservation of Similipal. The formation of cluster networks has been initiated as part of the ongoing forest protection program of Gram Swaraj. Such networks are created in the ‘catchment’ area of various weekly markets or haats and other socio economic activities that are held in the areas. Several consultations were held in Kanchhinda and Brahmangaon clusters to make people aware about the crisis of Similipal and their role in mitigating the crisis; 51 villages in these clusters were consulted and mobilised to strengthen their ongoing protection activities.

EVOLUTION OF COMMUNITY FOREST MANAGEMENT (CFM) AND JOINT FOREST MANAGEMENT (JFM)

Towards the fag end of 1960s, the depletion of natural forests in the district became rampant; by the early 70s, approximately half the forests adjacent to nearby villages had vanished. Basic necessities of the forest-fringe communities became scarce and the detrimental effects such as diminishing water levels in the springs, downward movement of ground water, decreasing annual rain fall, low agricultural outputs, etc, became visible. This critical juncture in sustenance led to the concept of “Conservation of the Natural Forest”; as a consequence, the community concern and participation in forest conservation obtained impetus in various corners of the district, popularlycalled Community Forest Management (CFM). Across Odisha, local communities demonstrated many successful models of CFM and Mayurbhanj played a pioneering role long before the term ‘Joint Forest Management (JFM)’ gained currency. People endured much and struggled a lot to save and regenerate forests entirely on their own, without any help whatsoever from the government or any other external agency.

The government took a long time to realize the need to involve local communities in state sponsored protection initiatives. The realization led to a resolution passed on 1st August, 1988 that sought to involve local communities in forest protection, promising certain benefits and concessions to them. The provisions of the resolution were modified in 1990, 1993, 1996 and 2002 in the light of guidelines issued by the central government, known later as JFM. Despite all the amendments and innovations, however, JFM has simply refused to build a partnership between people and forest department in the district. There are many reasons for this, the foremost being the schematic approach of government initiatives with their customary insistence on a formal and strictly regimented organizational structure, with a scheme which invariably places the state as a donor and the people as recipients. This hardly makes for a relationship of equality and trust between the two stakeholders.

Since Community Forest Management (CFM) initiatives evolved over a long time and after a lot of experiments, taking into account local conditions, they seldom felt the need for a formal organisational structure to sustain their movement. Though their organisational structures differ from village to village and from community to communtiy, they are essentially democratic and decentralised bodies reflecting the ground realities of the area. The most contentious issue in JFM from which the community differs has been that of benefit sharing. The JFM guidelines regarding final benefit sharing have undergone changes over the years and are quite regimented but lack clarity. While there are no formal rules for benefit sharing in CFM, there is a scope for flexibility, depending on the need of the community. The state has deliberately stayed away from recognizing community forest protection initiatives, something that would have been the most natural and prudent thing to do. Oddly, however, even JFM has no legal backing, though it is governed by state resolutions.

There are many sucessful models of community forestry in Mayurbhanj district. It is estimated that about 700 villages are protecting the forest attached to their village which is a unique experience in the country. For example, the Budhikhamari JFPC, which as a federation of 95 Village Forest P r o t e c t i o n C o m m i t t e e s , s h o w s u n c o m m o n leadership in forest protection over the last twenty years. It is a c o m m u n i t y initiated, and community owned, historical movement that began from remote villages such as Hatikote, Ahari and Budhikhamari and reached hundreds of villages.

PEOPLE, CULTURE AND FORESTS

Mayurbhanj is a district with a predominantly indigenous population and is classified as a Scheduled Area. As per the 2001 census, 57% of the total population of 22,21,782 are tribal people. About 18 different indigenous groups live in the district, prominent among them being the Lodha, the Mahali, the Munda, the Mundari, the Oraon, the Santal, the Saora, the Shabar, the Saunti, the Bethuudi, the Bhuinya, the Bhunja, the Bhunjia, the Gond, the Ho, the Kharia and the Kolha. The Santal are the dominant group among the various indigenous people. Several religious practices, such as the karam puja, the jahira puja, the baha sendra, the akhan sendra, the mah-mane, the bahabanga, the maghei puja, and the attharadeuli puja show a symbiotic relationship between the people and the forests. Up to 121 different kinds of NTFPs are collected by the adivasi people of Mayurbhanj, for their own use as well as for sale. It is estimated that 28-40% of the income in a household is derived from NTFPs; the dependency of Khadia and the Mankdia groups on the forest is higher as they depend almost completely on the forest for their survival.

Gram Swaraj, through its forest-based livelihood programme, is supporting the indigenous communities in sustainable harvesting of NTFPs. They are also providing appropriate technology for value addition of NTFPs and aggregating small quantities of products at the household level at a marketable scale. Other important inputs that Gram Swaraj provides are institutional support and links to a better market.

THE WIND OF CHANGE – PESA & FRA

The provision of Panchayats Extension to Scheduled Areas (PESA) came into force in December 1996. The basic provisions of the PESA were aimed at facilitating participatory democracy in tribal areas by empowering the Gram Sabha to manage and control its own resources. After the enactment of PESA, the Odisha government amended the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act, 1964;the Odisha Panchayat Samiti Act, 1959; and the Odisha Zilla Parishad Act, 1991, in December, 1997. In March 2000, the Forest Department brought out an executive order – called the NTFP policy – which classified forest products into NTFPs, MFPs, Lease-bar items, Tree-borne oilseeds, etc. The policy handed over ownership, control and management of over 60 items to Gram Panchayats.

In May, 2000, the Panchayati Raj Department came out with a set of guidelines providing for registration of traders and management of MFPs by the Gram Panchayat, and outlining the roles of forest officials, Tribal Development Co-operative Corporation and Odisha Forest Development Corporation. The rules conferred ownership rights over 68 MFPs to the Gram Panchayat and laid down guidelines for registration of traders, regulation of the trade, fixation of price at the Panchayat Samiti level, reporting structures etc. The latest amendment to the transit rules came in December, 2002. Under the amended Odisha Timber and other Forest Produces Transit Rules, 2002, MFPs can now be transported without a Transit Permit.

Meanwhile, the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Bill, 2006, is a watershed event and the culmination of a hard-fought and prolonged struggle of adivasis and other forest dwellers of the country. For the first time in the history of India’s forests, the state formally admits that rights have been denied to forest dwelling people for long, and the new forest law attempts not only to grant that right but also to give forest communities’ a primary role in forest management. The Act as legislated by the Indian Parliament marked a radical departure from earlier Forest Acts in the country, and the forest dwellers of the country can gain from it. In another very significant section, the Act says that all forestlands – irrespective of location and category – traditionally used by communities would be henceforth treated as a community forest resource; the forest dwellers can act decisively in conserving those resources.

The challenge now is to improve the mechanism for the implementation of the Act to entitle millions of adivasi people and thousands of forest protecting groups. Gram Swaraj is attempting to mobilise communities and collaborating with the local administration for entitlement of Community Forest Resource; 30 villages have been taken up on a pilot basis in this ongoing process.

Nature can thrive only if people are motivated to nurture it and can flourish only through their endeavours. The Tribal Forest Rights Act can accomplish this. It could bring to an end the systemic campaign to destroy India’s forest cover, making it useless from the perspective of indigenous peoples. Though nature is bountiful the adivasi people who living in forest areas are are afflicted by poverty and malnutrition. We have to change this equation.