community conserved areas of north east india status...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Community Conserved Areas of North East India : Status, Challenges and Opportunities
7‐9 May Venue: Nowgaon Girls College, Govt. of Assam
Nowgaon
Proceedings
Kalpavriksh, Pune and
Biodiversity and Conservation Programme, Winrock International India, New Delhi
2
1.0 The Welcome and the Introduction to the workshop
Dr. Ajanta Dutta Bordoloi, Honorable Principal of PG Girls College, Nagaon welcomed the participants (List at Annexure 1). While the participants introduced themselves, setting the tone for
the workshop, the college students, gifted the participants with handicrafts and set the tone for a workshop designed to deliberate on the Community Conserved Areas (CCAs) of North East India. Dr. Jayanta Sarma , Faculty at the college and Sudipto Chatterjee, Group Coordinator, Biodiversity and Conservation Programme of Winrock International India apprised the participants of the global national initiative recognizing community efforts in conservation. The present workshop on structured to discuss with participants the status, challenges and opportunities and collectively decide on a roadmap to strengthen the CCAs in future.
Sudipto presented the thematic areas which to be covered in the three say workshop viz., 1. An introduction to CCAs of India 2. The policy Environment for CCAs in North East India 3.The case studies on CCAs undertaken in North East India followed by presentations by participants on the CCAs of their respective states. 4. Community Conserved Areas in the Global Context 5. Discussion on Impacts on developmental pressures in North East India and Pros and Cons of the laws and the policies
5. Group Discussion on role of stakeholders and documenting CCAs through a Global Database 6. The Way forward in simple doable steps.
2.0 An introduction to the CCAs of India . Ms. Neema Pathak Broome, Kalpavriksha , Pune, made a presentation on the CCAs of India which highlighted peoples role in conservation . At the outset, she placed before the participants a broad definition of Community Conserved Areas that which helps in recognition of a diversity of community initiatives that leads to protection of forests and its biological diversity. An important critieria for categorizing a CCA is essentially empowerment of people that enables them to participate and influence the decision making processes that impact their livelihood. She apprised the participants on the present level of efforts on community based conservation including documentation of the traditional practices, communities associations with species and habitats ,
Neema Pathak Broome
3
acknowledgement , adaptation and strengthening the newer initiatives . She exemplified CCAs through the community conservation efforts at Chandrapur, Tarun Bharat Sangh’s exemplary work on Alwari Sansad in Rajasthan, conservation in Khonoma, Nagaland , Jardar Gaon in Uttarakhand and many others. She mentioned that while at many locations there has been a severe breakdown of traditional institutions, there are others where on the contrary a revival. Chilika lake being a typical example. While efforts have been initiated to document the CCAs in India, the ecological studies remain a gap area to assign their conservation values. Like any other category of forests, CCAs are subject problems, competing land uses for sustenance and livelihood, human wild like conflict conservation efforts in government controlled lands are to name a few. There has been a paradigm shift in the global out look – the CCAs are receiving more attention and recognition at both International and national fora. National Wild life Action Plan (NWAP), financial outlays in the Planning Commission ,schemes at Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) in Government of India and efforts of the International Union for Conservation of nature
(IUCN) and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) on support to Conservation outside the protected Area network are strong pointers to this direction. CCAs in India need support in terms of site specific adaptive and management strategies. This could be achieved through dialogues, meetings and sharing of experiences at national , state and regional levels.
Release of the publication ‘A Directory of CCAS in India’. A publication titled A Directory of CCAs of India, edited by Ms. Neema Pathak and published by Kalpavriksh , Pune was released following the presentation . Mr. Lyngdoh representing the traditional institution of ‘Hima’ in Meghalaya , formally released the publication. This Directory is a compilation on many efforts or practices of local rural communities at conservation of biological diversity being referred to as Community Conserved Areas (CCAs). It has taken ten years and contributions from many individuals and agencies to bring out this Directory. It hopes to contribute towards gaining a deeper understanding on conservation, livelihoods, peoples' rights and development, through a series of case studies and analysis of ground situation in different states of India. There are 140 case studies from a diversity of ecosystems, communities, and kinds of efforts from 23 states.
3.0 Technical Session : 3.1 The Policy environment that supports Community Conservation Initiatives
Mr. Lyngdoh releasing the directory on CCAs
4
3.1 Dr V.T. Darlong, World Food Programme, New Delhi mentioned that CCAs are historical, cultural and customary to the populations in North East. With the process of development, CCAs have modernized with the different aspects of developmental requirements. In terms of the policy environment, CCAs in North east are as old as Indian Forestry,
however chronicling of events of forestry in North East has been dismal.
Assam Forest Regulation Act of 1891 recognized four types for Forests viz., Reserve Forests, Village Forests and other forests. Scheduled Areas (North C achar Hills and Karbi Anglong in Assam, Garo and Khasi Hills in Meghalaya, Dhalai district in Tripura)) and Non Scheduled States (Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur and Nagaland) through the Article 371, District Forests Act for Mikir Hills in Mizoram and Nagaland Forest Acts of the Indian constitution provide ample scope for constitution of village forests and the community rights and hence setting up of Community Conserved
Areas. The Panchayati Raj Act and the PESA (extension in Scheduled Areas) provides scope for creating common property resources. He pointed out at a ground reality that while communities understand the ecological services the forests provide , they look at economic benefit from the forests.
Case studies on CCAS of North East India 3.2 An introduction to the Case studies on the North East – Sudipto Chatterjee, Biodiversity and Conservation Programme, Winrock International India, briefed the participants of the four case studies Site selected under an IUCN supported study. The case studies include 1. The Thembang Bapu CCA of Arunachal Pradesh 2. The Dzongu region of Sikkim 3. The Karbi Anglong , Goalpara and Marghareta in Assam 4. The sacred Forests of Meghalaya . The workshop had scheduled presentations on the case studies as well from the participants of the workshop on their respective CCAS.
ee
Dr. V.T. Darlong
Sudipto Chatterjee
5
3.3 The presentations on the case studies and other CCAs of North East Presentations: 3.3.1 Mr. Pijush Kumar Dutta, Sr. Programme Officer, WWF‐India. Arunachal Pradesh made a presentation on the Thembang Bapu CCA in Dirrang, West Kameng and the Pangchen Lumpo Muchat Community Conserved Area, Tawang districts of Arunachal Pradesh. He began his presentation with the waning traditional practices in light of newer threats and pressures to the forest which necessitated constitution of CCAs in Western Arunachal Pradesh in spite of the fact that most of the forests in Western Arunachal Pradesh are categorized as Unclassed state Forests. The project initially supported by Sir Dorabjee Trust, has already registered the Thembang bapu , one of the two CCAs as a society . Simple management plans based on availability of the resources , productivity of the grazing lands and critical wildlife habitats . Income generation activities through the CCA has been mailnly through ecotourism, and of the 54 household 36 have benefited .
Discussions that followed. Neeraj Vagholikar urged for a discussion on how globalization would impact on the traditional knowledge system, to what extent these can break down and how conducive are the global processes. Tasneem and Sangeeta commented on the needs for modifications of the traditional system. Ashish Kothari from Kalpavriksha wanted to know about the motivation behind setting up of the CCA in Thembang.
Pijush Dutta
6
3.3.2 Nandita Haziraika, Ecosystems, Guwahati, Assam presented on the Eagles Nest Sanctuary,
Arunachal Pradesh. She clarified at the outset that The case study does not technically into a CCA but may help many of the other CCA initiatives. She made a presentation on the efforts made by the Takin Trust and the Bugun Conservation Society, Dr. Rammana Athreya’s initiative since 2005 with the logistical support provided by Ecosystems India that spearheaded livelihood conservation activities in vicinity of the sanctuary. Discovery of a new bird species Liochichla bugunorum and its taxonomic naming after the Bugun tribal community has presently spindled community enthusiasm and the learning experiences of the project developed an understanding of designing and implementing ecotourism projects. 3.3.3 Jayanta Sarma, Faculty at Girls College, Nagaon presented the case studies in Assam ( Karbi Anglong, Goalpara and Marghareta) in Assam. His presentation focused on how people manage their forests and water resources as a part of their livelihood system. Delving upon the cultural ethos behind these practice, he mentioned that conflicts amongst the communities are rather conflicts for natural resources and for self identities. He substantiated his argument through the pattern of demographic changes in Assam due rehabilitation of immigrants and a spate of events of civic unrest. He called for better understanding of the social issues for a sound and robust conservation planning. The three locations in the case study in Assam focused on Rabhas in Goalpara, The Karbis in Karbi Anglong and the Singphos in Marghareta. In Karbi he spoke on the interventions of the state Forest Department in enhancing the sacred forests through institutions which are very similar to the Joint Forest Management. Showing a terrain model he showed how the villagers at Parmesor (see plate below) protect a CCA thatb ensures availability of the water . He apprised the participants of the private forests of Singhphos in a community context, their dependence on the forest for the spices an invaluable ingredient of their food and indigenous methods of tea cultivation.
Plate: Land use pattern at Kolbari Tok CCA at Karbi Anglong
Plate: Typical layout of a Singhpho dwelling and the private forest in Marghareta
Jayanta Sarma
7
Plate: Terrain profile at Malong Kisir CCA in Karbi Anglong The discussions that followed. Jayanta agreed to Dr A. K. Goswami’s comment and agreed to the needs of detailed ecological and economic studies. Sri Soumayadeep Datta from Nature’s Beakon suggested that CCAs can be identified within notified protected areas also. He cautioned against incidents like the leasing of forest land citing the example of leasing of forest land to premier oil company and subsequent withdrawl of the lease. He mentioned that inspite of protection provided by the local communities in Kaziranga, compensations are not me to the local communities. He complained that funding from the Government agencies often do not trickle
8
down to the local communities. He commented also upon the highly cost intensive wildlife conservation practices like translocation of Vultures from Dibrusaikhowa to Breeding center at Buxa and translocation of Rhino from Kaziranga to Manas He apprised of his efforts to stall large scale deforestation by Shedukpens ndear the Eagles Nest WLS and Khellong Forests by arranging for joint patrolling among the Sherdukpens and Buguns.
To Sisir’s (Foundation for Ecological Security, Anand) query on the institutional structure at Thembang, Pijush replied that WWF opted for a new fresh institution since panchayat was too political a body. Sisir to Pijush. Pijush also mentioned that the monetary benefit through compensation was too large resist in comparison to the economic benefits from the CCA. This has posed a challenge to implementation of his project in
Western Arunachal Pradesh. To Neema’s query on nature of incentives for those community representatives who do not benefit from the conservation directly, Nandita Hazarika replied that they benefit from Welfare funds and capacity building . She also added that there is an increasing level of interest from larger commercial ventures like the ITC and Taj Group which pose a threat to small community initiatives. The Community representatives from Goalpara‐ including Polumi Rabha and Budhesar spoke about their respective experiences in the CCAs of Hamren in Karbi Anglong . Polumi spoke about the Mahila Samithy which is struggling to empower the women and prevent illegal cutting of trees from the forests. Budhesar spoke about his experiences on working with the Forest Department at hathigaon. People have an iota of suspicion while working with the Forest Department. He also spoke about the Karbi Anglong Conservation society which is trying to undertake afforrestaion of Timber and non Timber forest species. Ms Mamoni spoke about the biodiversity registers in village Bodahpur in Goalpara. 3.3.4 Ajoy Das presented on the Deepor Beel a Ramsar site near Guwahati. Touching upon Aranyak’s campaign in this wetland, he raised the issue of elephant deaths due the operational railway track along the beel. He expressed concern over relocation of the city’s garbage dump at Depor beel, as an outcome of a Public interest litigation in Guwahati High court.
Soumyadeep Dutta
9
Mamoni Saikia raised the issue of implications of stone quarrying in Goalpara. 3.3.5 Ms. Bhaswati Goswami from Centre for Policy Studies and policy research read a paper on the Organization’s efforts with local communities to save the Brahmaputra river Dolphin in Guijan near Tinsukia, Kukumara in Kamrup and in Dhubri (see Map) .
Dr. Bhaswati Goswami
Plate : Mapping locations of Dolphin Conservation projects of Center for Policy Studies Guwahati
3.3.6 Dr. V.T Darlong shared his during his tenure in in the NERCOMP project supported by IFAD. He introduced to the participants and briefed them on the manadate and functions of the 3 United Nations Food Agencies ‐ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), World Food Programme (WFP) and
10
the International Fund for Agriculture and Development (IFAD) . All the three agencies are based in Rome. While WFP is mandated to meet the food requirements in emergency situation and natural disasters like earthquakes and Tsunami, IFAD was set up to empower local communities and buid their capacities to become self sufficient in terms of food. Global operations of IFAD started in 1978 and in India in 2000. Titled as Community Biodiversity Conservation Programme, the project was spread over in 1060 sq km of areas in 6 districts of Meghalaya, Assam and Manipur. (NAME THE DISTRICTS) NERCOM faced social , economic and ecological challenges. . With demand for individual ownership of land, the common pool resources were gradually lost. In addition, there has been unequal resource exploitation from the CPR to benefit the elites in the community. The traditional systems of governance in the region are intact but community resource management has succumbed to its inherent weakness . Absence of management practices, little role of women in decision making . changes in the power equations and conflicts in the governing systems were some of the social challenges. The economic challenges include conflicting and competing and conflicting resource expectations from CCAs. CCAs were viewed to provide NTFPs., firewood, for water for irrigation and consumption. The Environmental challenges included lack of awareness and an absence of a concept of ‘tomorrow’ i.e. the practice of sustainable use today for availability of the resource tomorrow was lacking. There is a lack of clarity in policies w.r.t. to economic incentives that would promote CCAs. Regulations and policies need to shift from ‘banning’ to ‘sustainable utilization’. Competing policies within the government (e.g. horticulture vs. forest) have failed in maintaining the biodiversity values. Schemes of plantations under the Forest Department mostly promote 2‐3 commercially important species but not to protect entire patch of forests. The concept on payment for environmental services is yet to develop strong roots. CCAs need to be maintained at a landscape level and not in isolated patches as is presently done today. These should be contiguous to facilitate wildlife migration. Simple management practices can be framed by villagers themselves which could be combination of a set of prohibitive, extractive, exploitative , facilitative and regenerative rules. He concluded his presentation by Saying that stand alone projects would be a challenging job. He also invited the participants to discuss on Wildlife farming as an livelihood option. In its next phase IFAD the project is scheduled to scale up its operation to Tripura, Mizoram and Sikkim, he informed. Discussions that followed.
The participants collectively voiced against any wildlife farming which may further aggravate wildlife crime. Jayanta Sarma stressed on value addition of wild food collections and suggested a cluster based approach for enhancement of market.
11
3.3.7 Dr. Ghanashyam Sharma ,The Mountain Institute, Gangtok presented on the sacred landscape of Sikkim. This includes the sacred rivers and lakes, the Demazong landscape refered in ‘Neysol’ a sacred Buddhist text and the 17th Century old Dzumsa system in Sikkim . He spoke on the traditional management of resources in the Lachen and Lachun valley by the Gyalpos, Shipos and the Gyapons of the Dzumsa system highlighting a socially acceptable and ecologically adapted system. Ghanashyam mentioned that most of the protected areas in Sikkim were declared during the period 1970 – 1990 with inadequate zonation of buffer forests. Khasmal and Gorucharan forests meant for grazing and other bonafide use by the community inspite categorized legally in the state legislations are not practically available. He presented before the participants the conservation initiatives of The Mountain Institute through its Himal‐rakshak and Pokhri Samrakshan programmes. The discussions that followed Tasneem and Neema, Kalpavriksha wanted to know more about decision making process and the structure of the Pokhri Sanrakshan committee and if the same operates in a manner similar to JFM. Ghanashyam informed that villagers chose the members of the Pokhri Samarakshan Samity hence the institutional structure is very different from JFM. To Nandita’s querry on relationship between the traditional and modern institutions , Ghanashyam replied that traditional institutions focus more on the religious and sacred aspects of life while modern institutions attempt a an integrated approach.
Along discussion on the prevailing confusion on the definition of CCAs followed. Ashish Kothari, Kalpavriksh voiced that amassing of ownership rights from communities and re‐involving them for community participation is a policy failure and calls for fundamental changes in legislation. Dr V T Darlong suggested relooking at the implementation of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 in Sikkim.
Soumayadeep questioned on role on international organizations while communities do all the protection. Jayanta suggested that there should not be too much dependence on the government for support, rather alternative systems of support should be looked for. Dr V T Darlong suggested a fresh look at the applicability of the Indian forest act , 1927 vis a vis the the state of Sikkim. 3.3.8 Sonali Ghosh, DFO, social forestry and wildlife division, Kokrajhar made a presentation on the case study of Chakrashila WLS. She began her presentation with an introduction to the Bodo Territorial
12
Council , an autonomous district council called BTAD. 39 state subjects have been transferred to the council including the Reserve Forests spread across an area of 8900 sq km. across 4 districts viz., Chirag Buxa, Udalgiri and XXXX. 40% of the geographical area under the BTC is forests . More than 6 ethnic tribes including , Bodo ,Rabhas, Garos, Nepalis. Koch and Rajbonshis inhabit the region. Unlike other tribals. Bodis practice settled cultivation so called plain tribals. Geographically, the entire area is contiguous to Manas, Black Mountan, Phipsoo WLS, Ripu Chirrang Elephant Reserve, Bornofi (?????) and Chakrashila WLS. The forests in Chakrashila are also habitat for the endangered primate Golden Langur which is reported to be endemic between the Sankosh and Manas river hence is a critical wildlife habitat. Bodos practice Bathu religion practiced which includes worship of Euphorbia cactus . Tribal in the area practice hunting but the Golden langur receives community protection as it is considered decendent of King Sugraveeva of Ramayana. Sacred places include mountain peaks like Sikri shila Disa . The forests in Chakrashila was nationalized in 1875. Dipu Chirrang, once the largest RF in Asia renowned for high quality Sal, was intensively managed . In this connection forest villages are located in this part of BTC. Some of the Coomunity Conseved Areas are located in Panbari , Ultapani, Jharbari and Kochubari , Jornagra, Gendrabil and even in the private Abhaya rubber garden
The success of Chakrashila can be gauged by increase in population of the Golden Langur as per a recent survey., increase in number of rescue cases in wildlife. There has been, however, some concerns as well . Off late there has been mushrooming of NGOs, increased expectation of the conservation volunteers for getting govt. jobs, conflicts amongst the NGOs and absence of grazing reserves.
3.3.9 Hillol Jyoti , Arnmayak, made a presentation of Shankarghola in Bongaigaon district near Dhubri . He presented on community conservation efforts in curbing illegal timber harvesting and protection to the Golden Langur, livelihood improvement programmes Inventorization of biodiversity and water conservation efforts.
3.3.10 Arnab Goswami from Natures Foster presented on the conservation efforts in Kakoijana Reserve Forest. The project initiation was with ecological research on the Golden langur and nursery development which was later scaled to livelihood improvement programme .
. 4.0 Mr, Adrian, Monitoring and Evaluation Officer, IFAD, Shillong made a brief presentation on the experiences on implementation of IFAD project in the North East and focused his talk on institutional structures and regulations made by them for natural resources management. In the discussion that followed Sisir expressed his apprehensions on multiplicity of the institutions and queried on integration of these institutions in to the larger developmental processes.
13
5.0 PANEL DISCUSSION I : CCA and Developmental pressures. The panel discussion on Developmental pressures in the North East India was chaired by Dr. VT Darlong along with Ms Sonali Ghosh , Social forestry and Wildlife Division, Kokrajhar, BTC, Neeraj Vagholikar, Kalpavriksh, Pijush Dutta , WWF . The panel initiated the discussion with an definition of ‘Development’ and its meaning to different category of stakeholders. NE region as a whole under tremendous pressure to unleash its resources for development for hydroelectricity, transportation , tourism and income generation amongst others. Mining in Jayantia Hills and Marghareta, networking of roads throughout the NE region, change in land use are other developmental pressures. The 11th Five Year Plan looks at NE as a potential powerhouse for entire India. This implies 15‐20% of loss of forest cover from the North Eastern states. 120 MOUs have been signed in the state of Arunachal . Pradesh alone. A challenge ahead is to determine to calculate how much of forest land should be left for ecological services and requirements of the community. India has a plethora of laws related to environment yet the dismal state of implementation can be exemplified by the non utilization of compensatory afforestation fund. A point of concern was that a natural forest lost cannot be recreated. We continue to be impacted by the developmental aspirations. 5.2 Neeraj Vagholikar, Kalpavriksh, shared his experiences through his work on impact of infrastructure projects in NE India and on dams in particular. He apprised the participants that 168 dams have been envisaged for construction in the entire North Eastern region with an hydropower potential of around 60,000 MW of which 135 dams would be commissioned in Arunachal Pradesh alone for generation of 57,000 MW of electricity. For the state of Sikkim 29 large Hydroelectric projects.
The indigenous tribal community who are likely to be impacted are apprehensive of losing their access to the natural resources, in‐spite of the protection they receive through the Constitution . The Idus and Mishmis of Subansiri districts in Arunachal Pradesh with a population less than 11000 will get outnumbered by the 200,000 anticipated labour force. The region is already witnessing a spate of unrest in the region. Idu Cultural and Literature society has demanded that Dibang Valley be declared as Ecologically Sensitive Area. The landscape level impact of the submergence might be
small but social implications are likely to be very high. Loss of forests will further shorten the already shortened jhum lands (shifting cultivation lands). Procuring land for compensatory afforestation in
14
Unclassed State Forest is likely to emerge as another contentious issue as communities have ownership rights over these forests. The catchment area treatment would require large areas and in his opinion this has not been communicated to the communities upfront. Neeraj also expressed his concerns on the mining in Meghalaya, removal of boulders from West Siang which is the first line of defense against floods. Neeraj further discussed that often communities have no say in even of gigantic infrastructural projects and Public hearings and EIA’s remain a cosmetic exercise. Spaces in Indian legislation like National Environmental Appellate Authority exists which makes it makes it mandatory for the Ministry of Environment and Forests, to provide an explanation in event of an complain as why the MoEF has gone ahead with the EIA clearance. The new hydropower project will provide 2% of the revenue generated to the state, but the question remains will the communities will have a say in the decision making. He cited an example of governments decision of not constructing any dam beyond Chungthang valley in Sikkim 5.3 Pijush Dutta, WWF‐India, shared his experiences in Western Arunachal Pradesh mentioned that Government often takes advantage of the changing social fabric in villages where youngsters are not interested in livelihood through natural resources and privileged and educated in the villages have greater access to the bureaucracy and politicians. It would be difficult for the community representatives to overcome and resist the lure of huge compensations they are likely to receive in comparison to the smaller economic benefits they get from conservation initiatives like ecotourism. Its is not very easy to motivate and convince them. Pijush also drew the attention of the participants to large infrastructural projects beyond Indian borders in the neighboring countries in Bhutan and China. He cited examples of the flash flood in river Siang near Pasighat due to a dam burst in China. He also drew the attention of an apathy of the developmental agencies towards concerns of climate change in developmental projects. 5.4 Sonali Ghosh , Divisional Forest Officer, Social Forestry and Wildlife, Kokrajhar, Bodo Territorial council (BTC) pointed out the overlapping development agenda of multiple government agencies and community’s coping up with the same. In her opinion, economic incentives and its impacts are highly locale specific and in‐spite of the benefits large scale pressures are likely to continue. There has been a recent move by the government to integrate the implementation of Joint Forest management with schemes under Department of Agriculture but the schemes there is no clarity in method of implementation. Sonali also shared her experience in demarcating an eco‐sensitive zone around the Chakrashila Wildlife sanctuary dedicated to conservation of the Golden Langur in connection with clearance needed for a thermal power plant by the NTPC, a first industrial structure in BTC. Discussions that followed. Partho Das ‐ shared his case study that 2001 in Ranganadi river near Lakhimpur which has died down due to server of the feeder canal and construction of a dam upstream. He expressed his concern also on the Satjala wetland which was leased by the government for fisheries. The lease was revoked on strong opposition by the local communities. Rampant sand‐casting from river Brahmaputra and its tributaries have rendered the region infertile due to floods. The mosaic of boulders of different sizes along the course of river serve as excellent traps to sediments which on removal has made the region more vulnerable to floods.
15
Dr Ghanashyam Sharma apprised that new development agencies are reported to take into account the hazzrads of climate change impacts while planning. He mentioned that its an irony that in Sikkim the study on carrying capacity and dam construction was simultaneously done. Neeraj expressed his concern over the sustainability of the CCAs in face of globalization and market forces. Concerned about the sustainability of the CCAs Neema queried on the linkages between the developmental projects and natural resources projects like NEERCOMP through IFAD. Soumayadeep commented that ecological security is economic security for the poor and hence any developmental project that jeopardizes ecological security ignites the community. He cited examples of withdrawal of Premium Oil company, discontinuation of seismic survey and no developmental work around 5 sqk around the Kaziranga national Park.
Tasneem commented that even the larger development processes like urbanization impact natural resources.
Sisir drew similes with the state of Orissa. Many projects in the state now report of upstream downstream conflicts, floods due to unregulated water flow. He suggested Cost – Benefit analysis of the major dams constructed. Sangeeta, a student from the PG Girls College Nagoan mentioned that communities have to bear the brunt either way, during flooding as well as in the case of blockage of water in the dams. Mr. Lyngdoh from Meghalaya the difficult experience he as a person and his village faced due to uncoordinated activities of the PWD. He narrated the incident which led to a washout of the footbridge on 9th of September 2007. Partho _commented on the issue of eligibility and qualification of people who conduct EIA. He informed the participants that an EIA in Orissa written by TATA AIG. He said that the concept of Environmental flow defined as the minimum amount of flow needed for ecological services and human need during the lean season is not observed by most of hydrological operations. Sonali commented that the Planning Commission documents are very comprehensive and the expertise must be respected. We must realize that there are not too many advisors to the government.. Sharing her experiences through a recent meeting in Dehradun she suggested that economic incentives while undertaking development projects are being given serious consideration. Moreover donor agencies in the recent past have been declining support for construction of reservoir dams. Dr. Darlong ended the session by commenting that development is perceived in the national context and planners often miss the regional and local intricacies. Often the advantages of construction of dam is weighed against the huge cost incurred in controlling the flood downstream. The Government makes all efforts to ensure that people are settled outside the danger zone. He said that it is not enough for the communities to be vocal and identify problems but be proactive and suggest solutions. He cited the example of construction of channels to pump water from Dikrong to Ranganadi to minimize the downstream impacts. Although an expensive proposition but technically and economically viable.
16
He suggested that NTPC installs a permanent weather station at Charkrashila and support monitoring of pollutants and also behavior of the Golden Langur. He concluded that development is every‐ones aspirations and the implications are inevitable to the economy environment and society , we can still balnce and minimize the negative impacts and multiply the positive impacts. . Inter‐ generational equity has to be addressed. This would keep on triggering our minds to be able to support each other. All are working towards a coomon goal for a better environment.
6.0 PLENARY II . Discussions on Laws and Policies‐ Pros and Con
6.1 Ms Neema Pathak Broom made a presentation on Laws and Policies relevant to Community Conserved Areas – the Pros and Cons. She provided a very comprehensive summary of the national level laws, regulations and policies. On the Indian Forest Act, 1927 she commented that of the three category of forests , the Reserve , Protected and the Village Forests, the latter has not been effectively used except for the setting up of the Van Panchayats in the state of Uttarakhand with albeit little empowerment to the communities. The amendments to Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 in 2002 led to inclusion of Community and Conservation Areas as additional categories for protected areas. Till date only 3 Community Reserves and 40 Conservation Reserves could be declared. Low number of Community Reserves reflects apprehensions of local communities in placing forest areas under their ownership under this category. Most of the Conservation Reserves (that can be declared only in the government land ) have been carved of the 35 game reserves in Jammu and Kashmir. Moreover Conservation Reserves cannot be notified without the concern of the people . This happened in Kokreveluer where the State government initiated the proposal, the local panchayat gave the consent but people actually conserving the forests were not willing to have the area declared as Conservation Reserve. There is also no clarity as to who would initiate the proposal. On Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) she commented that in‐spite being an extremely legislation the law is silent on peoples the rights. The legislation is presently being used by the tribal communities in Arunachal Pradesh against construction of mega dams. The Panchayati Raj Act was initially considered revolutionary but got subsequently diluted due to the recent enactment of the Forests Rights Act. ( Neema to give examples – dilution of the Act in Maharashtra, the Case of Tendu patta in MP ) Under The Biodiversity Act, 2002 , every village is mandated to have a Biodiversity Management Committee (BMC), mandated with preparation of biodiversity inventories. The powers of the BMC is however minimal. Controversies exists with respect the benefit sharing rules of the Act. While the powers to consent to access to genetic resources rests with the
17
national level biodiversity authority (NBA), the villagers themselves have no say in event of their unwillingness to share the resources. Ms Neema suggested to the participants that a set of legislations could be best used in a combination. The Biodiversity and the National Rural Employment Generation Act (NREGA) can help communities undertake a planning and have a claim on the resources. Communities can draw advantages if the respective conservation locations are declared as World Heritage Sites. The North East in particular have a set of state laws like The Manipur Forest Rules, 1971, Meghalaya Forest (Removal of Timber) Regulations Act, 1981, The Mizoram forest Act, 1955, The Nagaland Forest Act 1988, The Arunachal Pradesh Anchal Forest reserve Act , 1975, The Assam Forest Regulation Act, 1986 and The Assam Forest Regulation Act 1891 which should be studied in depth in terms of their relevance to support CCAs. The Forest Policies in India, she commented that also cater to the needs of the people, giving example of target driven programmes like Joint Forest Management (JFM) and the National Wildlife Action Plan which have no legal backing. The provisions of the 11th Five Year Plan and the integrated development of protection of wildlife outside protected area network can be extremely supportive to the CCAs. She cited
examples of creation of CCAs within the PA as in Abohar in Punjab by the Bishnois. Declaration of CCAS under this scheme could lead to conflicts as well as in the case of Melakuttoor where people have developed a resentment against the Pas as well as the CCA.
Another issue that may crop up is that while CCAS are to be governed by the Chief Wildlife Wardens of the state while many of the CCAs might be under the jurisdiction of the other official agencies.
6.2 Dr Aroop Saikia , Faculty in Indian Institute for Technology, Guwahati made a presentation on the history of in Forestry in Assam during early 19th century (1800 – 1980 A.D) The 1800‐ 1850 was a period that witnessed exploitation by the East India Company and attempt to convert forest land to other forms of land use – horticulture and rubber gardens. and control of rivers . The period also saw a stiff completion amongst the British, Assamese and Marwari traders for Rubber produced in Manipur, Nagaland and Burma that had a lucrative market in London. To protect the property Rights the Inner‐line permit system was introduced. In 1850s The Public Works Department (PWD) suggested that separate areas for conservation be demarcated. This was also a time period when around 17000 acres of land area of forest area was deforested for constructions for the railways and Tea Companies. Forest Areas were handed over to the PWD for Conservation .With enactment of the Bengal forest act in 1868 , Assam Forest Department was formed . The British by then had brought in the expertise of German Foresters to promote preservation and conservation. Gustav Mann, an eminent forester of the time harped upon the fact the fact that forests in Assam are more similar to the forests of Burma than Bengal. The Assam Bengal forest Regulation came into existence in 1891 bringing in the rights and the forest laws. Given the nature of the forests and the ecosystems, Shifting cultivation was permitted and the Taungiya system brought in labours for maintaining and
18
managing the forests. The prospects of petroleum in Assam always deprived the state of large scale afforestation and plantations. The Bengal forest Act of 1878 categorized the forests of Assam into the categories of Unclassed State Forests and Reserve Forests. It was also realized that the revenue from the Reserved forests in Assam was very less. A major part of the forests were grasslands , hence there was request by the Revenue Department to the Forest Department to retain the land. With pressures from the Imperial government to raise revenue from the forests, the Char areas were converted to jute producing areas. Subsequently the revenue from the Forest Department increased due to purchase of timber for railway sleepers and tea chests. T In 1927, the Forest enquiry Commission was constituted. Until 1950s the Forest Department was not able to highlight the role forests, its coverage and role in maintaining the ecosystems.. With rising revenue from the plywood to the tune of 12% of the entire country, Teak and Sal plantations were introduced at a large scale loosing the concept of ecosystems. The agrarian Community subsequently became very powerful supported by political interests but at the cost of the forests. Arup suggested that the autobiographical writing of Shri Pramod Nath Bhattacharya who served the forests of Assam during 1930 ‐1960 who opined about the crisis that would unfold in 21st century. Conservation in Assam picked momentum from 1980 onwards. 6.3 Arshiya Urjeeva Bose, presented on Recognition of Forests Rights Act 2006 to benefit the scheduled tribes present in the forest land ( eligible to claim rights in forest land if settled before 2005) and the Non Tribal Communities (eligible if settled in forest land since past 75 years). She clarified that this includes land presently use and not new land is to be considered.. The Forests Rights Includes rights to Minor Forest Produces, . Community rights like grazing and fishing, rights through Traditional knowledge systems and to basic developmental facilities. Right holders can regulate their own access to the rights of the forests ie the law provides right to protect manage and protect forests, hence is of much relevance to CCAs. The Forests Rights act also ensures that right holders are empowered to stop any activity that can harm the forests. She emphasized that the right to hunting is not mentioned in the law. She provided the following cases where the law found its application ‐ In Andhra Pradesh, Vijayanagaram ‐ 900 cr Jindal Aluminium Refinery – nature of the challenge to be written by Arshiya ‐ In Orissa the villagers of Dhinkia has passed a resolution that POSCO will not be permitted to continue with their steel plant ‐In Kerala, communities in vicinity of the Katlapat sanctuary, have started protecting the sanctuary and claim ownership. ‐In Maharashtra, conservation efforts in Mendalekha has strengthened. ‐In XXXX , t he communities in vicinity of Bhadrama Wildlife Sancturay have used the section to set up committees for protection and claiming of rights.
19
The Act however has few limitations. It is silent on the distribution of conservation duties among the Forest Department and the the local communities. How the conserve duties are to be distributed between them and the FD . 2. Act does not talk about what how does the communities monitor its impact on the forests.
The discussions that followed: Will the Legal support can Communities use these for protect their forests from destructive development activities. Would this lead to conflict b/w communities . What would be the impact on potential CCAs Soumyadeep raised the issue of Dibrusaikhowa WLS. The NP and sanctuaries are also protected by communities. He suggested that policies should be able to capture the dynamics of specificities of Assam Neeraj queried if the law an opportunity for regeneration of degraded forest land. Jayanta commented on geopolitical implications and identity of the tribal communities.. He mentioned
about the extremely slow pace of the process of settlement of the claims. Suggested more awareness on the laws and policies. Dr. Darlong the cited the example from Tripura where claims have necessitated the involvement of other departments. Sonali mentioned that in the Buffer zone of Manas NP there are no councils or Panchayats. These villages are administered by Gram Sabhas. It will be difficult to validate
the claims of the tribal communities. Neema mentioned that settlement of the claims depends on strength and empowerment of the community. Ashish clarified One law cannot cover all aspects. He cited the example of the Critical Wildlife habitat Act which has subsumed peoples right. 6.5 Ashish Kothari, Kalpavriksh presented on the Policy environment in the International Arena Ashish initiated his presentation with history of Pas in India, with declaration of Corbett National Park in 1948 . Most of the PAS in India were declared after 1970. He mentioned however that Community protected areas are much older with a diversity of rules, regulations and customs. Steps taken by the Government is rather new to the human history. With present discussions on effectiveness of the protected areas, efforts are on to rope in communities in management of Protected Areas. The collaborative arrangement however it needs to consider the social and cultural changes the communities might have gone through.
20
Sacred spaces are possibly the oldest of CCAs in the world. Indigenous landscapes in Latin America , Australia, Columbia, Nomadic communities in Central Asia , marine and Sea ‐scapes in Indonesia and Philippines. CCAs are also reported in industrial countries like Italy as well, he mentioned. He provided examples of CCAs – First nationals PAs in Canada, Ind Pro (???) in Australia and Bio‐cultural Heritage Sites in South America. Ashish, briefed the participants about the International Conventions and initiatives that supports community Conservation efforts viz.,
‐ Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) ‐ Different categories of Pas under the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) ‐ The efforts of United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and World Conservation
Monitoring Center (WCMC) in preparing a database of CCAs of the world. 7.0 Group Discussions
7.1 Group Discussion 1 . Who can do what was facilitated by Dr. Nandita Hazarika from Ecosystems, Guwahati. Mr. Lyngdoh from Meghalaya summarized the discussions The group primarily discussed on the sustenance of the CCAs and deliberated on the motivational, social, political, external and financial needs. The group concluded that if CCAs are able to network amongst themselves at a grass‐root level and develop a strong base with an able leaderships, it is unlikely that the institution of CCA will collapse. However the institution would need a strong
technical support for its sustenance. A strong platform would be needed to share, learn and disseminate ideas . Discussions that followed‐ Soumyadeep mentioned that while many of the activities related to the functioning of the CCA may require financial support, community spirit for conservation does not requires the same. It is very important that NGOs involved in community conservation work should be monitored for often while designing initiatives they fail to procure prior consent of the communities . The communities are also financially benefitted of the project grants. Community conservation should not develop as a business. Mamoni Rabha observed that all case studies presented in the workshop highlighted only the economic activities of the women. Women however have a much larger role that needs to be highlighted. Pijush mentioned that communities are uniformly strong at all locations hence external supported should be provided wherever needed. He also said that safeguards should be made in conservation projects such that communities honor their commitments and do not go back on the same.
21
Musahari from BTC said that funding opportunities should be created for conservation areas beyond the protected area network. 7.2 Group Discussion II. Need for an International Database on CCAs. The discussion was facilitated by Ashish Kothari and presented by Ajoy Das. The group generally agreed that an international database would be helpful in strengthening the CCAs through recognition and support, the group however deliberated on the precautions the initiative must take. Salient points that were discussed in the group are as follows.
‐ Officials often raise suspicions to the donors interest in forest areas and are extremely apprehensive of bio‐piracy of the germplasm.
‐ The nature of information that may find place in the database should be non sensitive. ‐ Prior consent of the communities must be taken through a very strong local process ‐ Adequate care should be taken that the Traditional Ecological Knowledge is not misused. ‐ The involvement of the National Biodiversity Authority and the State Biodiversity Board
should be explored. ‐ Clarity must exist in defining and delineating CCAS ‐ Arrangements must be made to provide the feedback to the communities on their
respective CCAs. ‐ Authors publishing information about CCAs duly acknowledge the communities, share
benefits Discussions that followed – Tasneem queried if agencies specialized in preparing global databases
would also provide financial support for CCAs. Pijush suggested that Communities often reveal highly sensitive information due to over‐excitement. The responsibility rests with the agency to safeguard the interest of the community. He also questioned if a species focused initiative by a community would be categorized as a CCA. Hillol queried if a Wildlife Sanctuary could be converted to a CCA. Ashish clarified that following could be the strong indicators for identifying the CCAs:
‐Predominately the community take or influence major decisions that impact their forests and livelihood. ‐Land ownership is important but not an essential criteria. ‐Conservation is happening or there is conservation potential. ‐Community has existing institutional structure with rules or regulations (customary or written) that leads to conservation .
22
8.0 The Concluding Session : The Suggestions from the participants and the follow up action
‐Many of the corridors between the Protected Areas could be declared as CCAs‐ locations include corridors between Dibru Saikhowa and Laikhowa, Kaziranga to Orang etc, ‐The CCAs should be documented and mapped and categorized. ‐Success stories should be shared through the print and electronic media. ‐NGOs must function in coordinated manner ‐Traditional Knowledge systems must be validated through Science and Technology ‐More Workshops on awareness on CCAS in North East at least 2 more in Assam. Consultations must reach grassroots. ‐Interventions must be carefully designed respecting the community dynamics. ‐Women’s participation must be strengthened. ‐Monitoring of the performance of the NGOs must be done. ‐Increased dependence on natural resources due to population, growth and expansion must be checked. ‐Strategies should be drawn to meet global challenges. ‐ Revival of CCAs as being done in Meghalaya must be encouraged.
Dr. V.T Darlong suggested a road map ahead for strengthening the CCAs of the North East. He suggested developing a nodal agency for facilitating functioning of the CCAS through a thorough analysis of the current programmes and policies of the government. Support of the Industries through their Corporate Social Responsibility and village adoption schemes by certain Universities in India could be explored. Ashish Kothari suggested the following follow –up programme after the Workshop. ‐ Documentation of the case studies and awareness generation on CCAS. ‐ Strengthening Women’s participation ‐ Supporting ground level action by involving agencies like the North East Council and ‐ In‐depth analysis of the policy environment in the region.
Vote of Thanks Tasneem, Kalpavriksha, Pune gave the vote of thanks. The students of the PG Girls College received a copy of the Directory of CCAs of India.
23
Annexure 1. List of participants Raj (Dr.) Manik HOD, Geography Nowgaon Girls College 09435362702
Mahanta Nava Kumar Dept of Geography Nowgaon Girls College [email protected] Tel 03672 235640 Fax: 03672 235640
Hussain Dilwar Chief Executive ACIDO Burachapori lawkhuwa management Planning Committee A K Azad road Nagaon 09954956954 [email protected]
Goswami Bhaswati Communication Officer Center for North East Studies and Policy Research House No. 9 Bylane 2, rajgarh Road , Guwahati [email protected] 09435818839
Ghosh Sonali DFO Social Forestry Division Kokrajhar Govt. of Assam, Kokrajhar, Assam 03661270210 [email protected]
Pradhan Sisir Foundation for Ecological Security B2 BDA Duplex, baramunda Bhubaneshwar, Orissa 09437002194 [email protected]
Bhuyan (Dr) Putul KACRMS –IFAD KACRMS – IFAD – Hamren 03677 230123 [email protected]
Phangcho Joysingh President, Karbi Anglong Kangthur Asong (KAKA) Hamren Sai Ali, Karbi Anglong 03677230129
Darlong Dr. Vincent International Fund for Agricultural Development 2 Poorvi Marg, Vasant Vihar New Delhi 110057 09717696493 [email protected]
De Pritom Finance Officer Center for Environment Education C‐40 South Extension –II New delhi ‐49 09811888994 [email protected]
Das Mr. Ajoy Kumar Lawyer Aranyak House No. 105, Ganeshguri, R.WB. Road Guwahati 781005
Hazarika Dr. Nandita Ecsystems India 2D Nirvana Enclave, bashishthapur Bylane ‐3 Guwahati 781028 Tel: 2231412
24
09957387738
Derapi Pepima Data Operator Staff Member, IFAD Karbi Anglong, Hamren 09435242195
Dutta Pijush Kumar WWF‐India Dirrang, Arunachal Pradesh 0378024743 [email protected]
Dutta Sri Soumyadeep Director Natures Beakon Ward No. 1 , Dhubri Assam 783301 09435029402 [email protected]
Mushahary Sri Bhuban President
Goswami Dr. Anil Chairman , NCSTC , Assam U.N. bezbaruah Road Silpukhuri, Guwahati 781003 Tel: 03612260732 Fax: 0361 2634654 [email protected]
Saikia Ms. Mamoni District Programme Coordinator Assam Mahila Samatha Society Goalpara , Assam 03663 241313 09954522677 [email protected]
Imtienla (Ms) Ao, IFS Conservator of Forests, Rain Forest Research Institute Jorhat. Assam Tel : 0376 ‐2350272. Fax: 0376‐ 2350274 [email protected]
Muthukumaravel (Dr) C DFO, Nowgaon Wildlife Division Kathmari, Nagaon 09435500123 [email protected]
Jaseng D Sangma Gaiya Meen Wari (CCR) Meen Gittem Chutmang ( Complete Address Needed)
Chatterjee Sudipto Biodiversity and Conservation Winrock International India 788 Udyog Vihar, Phase V , Gurgaon Haryana 122001 09868182248 [email protected]
Lyngdoh N. Kingkerious HIMA Mawphlang Mawphlang, Shillong 09856004129
Jyrwa Tinborlang Mawphlang Representative Mawphlang
Lyngdoh Tambor Secretary Hima, Mawphlang Mawphlang, Shillong
Rollingstone M. Sangma Sr. Project Officer Samrakshan Charitable Trust ,Meghalaya
25
09863082456 [email protected]
Baghmara Bolsagre SG Hills, Meghalaya , 794102 0369 222187
Marbaniang Adrian Monitoring and Evaluation Officer NERCOMP –NEC Dhankheti, Shillong 09436100868 [email protected]
Deka Mr.Yarana jit Programme Coordinator Samrakshan Trust Bolsalgre, Baghmara,P.O. Baghmara, South Garo Hills Meghalaya 794102 03639 222187 [email protected]
Neema Pathak Broom Project Coordinator Kalpavriksha 908, Shri Dutta Kripa, Deccan Gymkhana Pune 411004 Maharashtra 020 25675450 09850952359 [email protected]
Rabha Sri Budheshwar Member of Forest Committee Dist Goalpara Post Suarmara 0913607845
Rabha Smt Poudumi Assam Mahila Samatha Society Village Bordak PO Badahpur panchayat Churarmali 09957527473
Sharma Ghanashyam, Programme Manager, The Mountain Institute Sahity Parishad “Abhilasaha’ Gangtok , Sikkim 737107 03592 ‐ 207942 [email protected]
Arshiya Bose Kalpavriksha Apt. No. 5 , 908, Shri Dutta Kripa, Deccan Gymkhana Pune, Maharashtra [email protected] 09448119224
Sikhnajhar Nounwguir Adventure Tourism Society PO and H.O Jharbari Dist Kokrajhar BTC , Assam, NE India 09954070539
Bose Sri Arnab General Secretary Nature’s Foster PO Box 41 Shastri Road , North Bongaigaon Assam 783380 09435121934
Singha Hilloljyoti Lecturer Zoology Department Birjhora Mahavidyalaya
Soud Rakesh Nature’s Beckon Nr. Bongaigaon College
26
Bongaigaon 09435120076 [email protected] [email protected]
Dolaigaon, Bongaigaon – 783380 09401345942 [email protected]
Tasneem Balasurwale Kalpavriksha 908, Shri Dutta Kripa, Deccan Gymkhana Pune, Maharashtra [email protected]
Kothari Ashish Kalpavriksha 908, Shri Dutta Kripa, Deccan Gymkhana Pune, Maharashtra 020‐ 25675450 [email protected]
Tsilie Sakhrie Secretary , Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary Khonoma village c/0 Home Appliances opp NST station Kohima 797001 09612001040
Sophi Mengiiseto Mathew Khonoma Nature Conservation and Tragopan Sanctuary Khonoma village c/0 Home Appliances opp NSI station Kohima 797001 09612304364
Wani Millind Kalpavriksha 908, Shri Dutta Kripa, Deccan Gymkhana Pune, Maharashtra O9423582519 [email protected]
Neeraj Vagholikar Kalpavriksha 908, Shri Dutta Kripa, Deccan Gymkhana Pune, Maharashtra 020 25654239 09822021371 [email protected]
27
Annexure 2
Community Conserved Areas of North East India‐ Status, Challenges and Opportunities
Organized by Kalpavriksh and Biodiversity and Conservation Programme, Winrock International India
7‐9 May 2009
Nowgaon Girls College, Govt. of Assam
Tentative Agenda
DAY 1 7th May 2009
9.00 ‐9.05 Welcome by Dr.Ajanta Dutta Bordoloi, Principal , Nagaong Girls College , Govt. of Assam
9.05‐9.30 Introduction to the workshop and introduction of participants facilitated by Sudipto Chatterjee, Biodiversity and Conservation Programme, Winrock International India
9:30‐10:30 Introduction to CCAs of India by Ms Neema Pathak, Kalpavriksh
10:30‐11:00 TEA BREAK
SESSSION I
28
Case studies and state wise presentations and discussions on CCAs, policy environment and emerging issues (focus on conservation status, governance, livelihoods and ecological benefits)
11:00 ‐12:00 The Policy environment that supports Community Conservation Initiatives by Dr.V Darlong, World Food Programme, New Delhi.
Introduction to the case studies on the CCAs in NE by Sudipto Chatterjee, Winrock International India (10 mins)
Arunachal Pradesh.
Thembang Bapu CCA: Pijush Dutta, WWF‐India (10 mins)
Other Arunachal initiatives if any (5 min. each)
Discussion
12.00 – 13.00 Assam
Kokrajhar CCAs: Sonali Ghosh, DCF Kokrajhar (10 mins)
Karbi Anglong, Goalpaara and Margahareta CCAs: Jayanta Sharma, (15 minutes), Nowgaon Girls College
Other Assam initiatives, if any (3‐4 min. each).
Discussions
13.00 ‐14:00 LUNCH
14:00 ‐15:00 Manipur
Presentation by W Rajesh, Manipur Nature Society, Imphal
29
Rejoinder presentations
15:00 ‐16:00 Meghalaya
CCAs in the state: B.K. Tewari, NEHU (10 min.)
NERCORMA – IFAD cases – Dr. Darlong,
Experiences of Samrakshan, Meghalaya
Other Meghalaya initiatives, 5 min. each
Discussion
16:00 ‐16:30 DISCUSSIONS AND WORKING TEA
16:30 ‐17:30 Mizoram
Presentation by Znoun Mawia. Center for Environment Protection
Other Mizoram initiatives
17:30‐ 18:30 Nagaland
Sendenui CCA: To be confirmed
Other Nagaland initiatives: Kalpavriksha V and other participants
DAY II 8th May 2009
9:00‐ 9:30 Sikkim
Presentations by Dr. Ghanshyam Sharma, The Mountain Institute, Gangtok
Rejoinder presentations
9:30 ‐9:45
30
Tripura
Presentation by Shri Apurba Datta, Range Forest Office, Dept of Forests, Govt. of Tripura, Agartala
9:45‐ 11:15 Policies that support Community Conservation Initiatives in the North East
Discussion
11:15‐ 11:30 Assam: The CCAs of Kokrajhar by Sonali Ghosh, DCF, BTC
SESSION II: PANEL DISCUSSIONS
CHAIR: Dr. Vincent Darlong , WFP, New Delhi
11:30 – 13:00 Development projects in the NE and implications for CCAs. Discussants: Sonali Ghosh, Neeraj Vagholikar, Raju Mimi and Pijush Dutta
13:00‐14:00 LUNCH
14:00 – 15:30 Legal and Policy Spaces – Pros and Cons: Neema Pathak, Kalpavriksh
Forest Rights Act and its implications – Ashriya Bose, Kalpavriksh
15:30‐ 16:00 International Context of CCAs, and Introduction to the Working Groups: Ashish Kothari, Kalpavriksh
16:00‐16:30 TEA BREAK
SESSION III. WORKING GROUP DISCUSSIONS
16.30‐17.30 Group I: What and how can support be extended to CCAs? What role can different actors such as NGOs, academics and government agencies play in extending support? (including: the MoEF scheme on CCAs)
31
Facilitated by Nandita Hazarika, Ecosystems India, Guwahati
17.30‐18.30 Group II: Global PA database and possibility of including CCAs in the same, pros and cons. What do community representatives feel about the issues related to recognition of CCAs nationally and globally? Do they feel that these efforts are playing a role in conservation and enhancement of livelihoods issues? Do they think that such recognition should happen?
Facilitated by Ashish Kothari, Kalpavriksh
DAY III 9th May 2009
CONCLUDING SESSION : The Way Ahead
9.00‐10:00 Issues emerging from CCAs in the NE: Moderation : Ashish Kothari
10.00 ‐11.00 Way ahead (simple, doable steps to be taken and who would take them).
11.00 – 11.05 Vote of thanks
11.00‐11:30 TEA
Proceed to field trip after lunch.