Impact of NTFP ban on the lives and livelihood of the ... - Vasundhara

More documents

Recommendations

Info

o<strong>of</strong>s during its construction it had been strongly objected by the Chakutias. However, theirweakness for tea was letter used by the department to persuade them.Gond:The Gonds are the other major Tribes <strong>of</strong> the area who are able to speak Oriya apart from their ownlanguage Gondi. Gonds have been dwelling in most part <strong>of</strong> the Sunabeda along with the Bhunjias.The marriages between relatives <strong>of</strong> different clans are encouraged among the gonds. Some <strong>of</strong> theTraditions like Bhuasuni provide women the choice <strong>of</strong> choosing their mates where she is sent on atrial basis to her future in- laws. Her convenience in her future in –laws house determine theprospect <strong>of</strong> the marriage. Apart from this, either the bride or the groom party can visit each other’svillage for conducting the marriage as per the convenience.Gonds are mostly settled cultivators and depend on agriculture and forest produces for theirlivelihood.Pharias:Pharias have been accorded the Scheduled Tribes status in the neighboring Chattisgarh State whereas in Orissa they are not in the Scheduled Tribes category. They mainly prefer to stay in the place <strong>of</strong>bamboos stretches, as they are very skilled bamboo weavers and basket builders. They dependheavily on bamboo products selling for their livelihood.Natural Resources and related livelihood options:The major livelihood options for the Tribal people <strong>of</strong> the Sunabeda sanctuary are consumption andselling <strong>of</strong> forest produces and cultivation on forestland. Lack <strong>of</strong> other livelihood sources and poorconnectivity with the outside world has prompted people to coexist with their nature and draw theirsource <strong>of</strong> living from them. Collection and selling <strong>of</strong> <strong>NTFP</strong> like Mahul, Kendu leaves, Char, Amala,Harida, Bahada, Sal leaves etc provided them the opportunity to supplement their incomesignificantly. On an average the selling <strong>of</strong> <strong>NTFP</strong> ensured 4-5 months <strong>of</strong> livelihood security for eachfamily in the area. Abundance <strong>of</strong> varieties <strong>of</strong> <strong>NTFP</strong> and their proper processing at the householdlevel had helped to grow a traditionally well developed market over the years in some <strong>of</strong> theimportant villages like Kermeli, Bharuamunda, etc. Traders from far <strong>of</strong>f places frequented the placeto collect the <strong>NTFP</strong>s from the doorsteps <strong>of</strong> people and bartered them with paddy and other foodgrains. The volume <strong>of</strong> trading can be gauged from the fact that traders visited the place with truckloads <strong>of</strong> grain to collect invaluable <strong>NTFP</strong>s. This kind <strong>of</strong> traditional informal network also providedample opportunity for Pharia Tribes to sell their bamboo products to the outside traders duringtheir visit. It is estimated that <strong>NTFP</strong>s (Like Mahul, Chahar, Harada, Kendu leave etc) worth 35Lakhs rupees used to be traded before the imposition <strong>of</strong> restriction in 2000(Oriya Daily, Prajatantra,Dated17th July 2002). Apart from other items <strong>of</strong> <strong>NTFP</strong>, availability <strong>of</strong> large quantity <strong>of</strong> Kenduleaves had prompted the Government to set up 22 Phadis for collection <strong>of</strong> Kendu leaf within the28
sanctuary area. Dhaniram majhi, who previously worked as a phadi in one <strong>of</strong> phadis at Katingpanirevealed that each person involved in Kendu leaf plucking earned around 5000 Rs on an averageeach year .It appeared to be a dynamic process that involved interactions at various levels foreconomic transactions. The Tribal people <strong>of</strong> the area use timbers for construction <strong>of</strong> their houses,firewood for cooking, bamboos for fencing, ro<strong>of</strong>ing and making small handicraft items and grassesfor thatching their ro<strong>of</strong>.Apart from the heavy dependence <strong>of</strong> people on forest produces, majority <strong>of</strong> people in fourpanchayats have been cultivating on forestlands since last five-six decades. Cultivation on theseencroached lands has been supplementing the livelihood <strong>of</strong> the people, as the magnitude <strong>of</strong> revenueland possessed by people is very less. Sample data collection in some <strong>of</strong> the selected villages <strong>of</strong> fourpanchayats namely Sunabeda, Kermeli, Bharuamunda and Soseng depicts magnitude <strong>of</strong> forestlandssince last four decades.Sl No. Gram Panchayat Name <strong>of</strong> the village Total No. OfHouse holdsNo. <strong>of</strong> householdsencroachedforest landsTotal landencroached1 Bharuamunda Bharuamunda 154 37 74.962 Chitidora 36 35 69.93 Katingpani 102 77 181.544 Kermeli Gola<strong>ban</strong>dha 92 39 63.735 Kankermanji 108 77 223.566 Pethiapali 79 60 196.787 Sunabeda Shi<strong>ban</strong>arayanpur 16 16 408 Jamgaon 83 67 187.339 Tlabela 20 3 1110 Jhallarama 34 34 155.2611 Soseng Rupiam 54 53 318.1512 Deosil 53 48 222.513 Adar 66 57 306.2414 Soseng 127 74 210.31Bhawsil 45 30 137.67(Source: Survey Conducted by Local NGO, VISWAS)Even during erstwhile Zamindari system <strong>of</strong> Khariar, the Tribal had access to some un prohibitedspecies like Dha, Amala, Karda, Salai, Arjun etc <strong>of</strong> two feet girth. There were provisions <strong>of</strong> royaltyfor accessing Tree species <strong>of</strong> some prohibited species like Saguan, Bija, Sisoo, Sal, Bandhan, andAchu <strong>of</strong> more than two feet girth. Details <strong>of</strong> these rights and concessions enjoyed by the local Tribalover forests and forest produces are mentioned in the “Wazib-ul-urz” <strong>of</strong> the Ex-Zamindari system(Life in Sunabera Plateau by N.Pattanaik, P.K.Mohanty and T.Sahoo, Page 29). Analysis <strong>of</strong> theserights and concessions also reveal that people had the access to fruit bearing trees despite theultimate right <strong>of</strong> Zamindar over the trees. Only while selling fruits derived from such trees they weresupposed to sell fruits to contractors appointed by Zamindar. Tribal staying there also had the rightto use small and miscellaneous trees <strong>of</strong> girth up to 2 feet. It is quite obvious that the erstwhileZamindari system was aware <strong>of</strong> people’s dependence on their natural resources and had made29
Page 1 and 2: IMPACT OF CONSERVATION POLICIES (SP
Page 3 and 4: ABSTRACTThe word Conservation is on
Page 5 and 6: MethodologyMethodology for the stud
Page 7 and 8: Issues in Protected Areasacross the
Page 9 and 10: non-timber forest produce, fish and
Page 11 and 12: those people who have been cultivat
Page 13 and 14: face lot of diffic
Page 15 and 16: The Order of Supre
Page 17 and 18: Forest DivisionsBoudh Forest Divisi
Page 19 and 20: item especially after monsoons. Lea
Page 21 and 22: CASE STUDY - 2SUNABEDA WILDLIFE SAN
Page 23 and 24: Manikgarh hill range extends in a s
Page 25 and 26: History of Protect
Page 27: The opinion of the
Page 31 and 32: surveyed villages but due to the pr
Page 33 and 34: In the year 2003, 134 households fr
Page 35 and 36: Village: KatingpaniKatingpani came
Page 37 and 38: Loss of KL Income
Page 39 and 40: 9%Growing Food Insecurity10%14%32%
Page 41 and 42: Village: GadgadaTotal Household- 18
Page 43 and 44: CASE STUDY-3SIMILIPAL WILDLIFE SANC
Page 45 and 46: diet of the people
Page 47 and 48: THE ONLY OPTION OF LIVELIHOOD SNATC
Page 49 and 50: is no bus service or any other mean
Page 51 and 52: Annexure-1BAN ON NTFP</stro
Page 53: 1. Sal/SialiLeaves2. Tenduleaves3.

Impact of NTFP ban on the lives and livelihood of the ... - Vasundhara

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?