Wildlife vis-a-vis people's livelihoods
Sunday, 19 December 2010
Encroachers into areas that are best left to the dangerously dwindling wildlife of Bangladesh, now have provisions within the forest act for compensation, should they be maimed, killed or their property destroyed by one or the other of the beasts. It would be fair also to have strict rules so that the latter do not lose their lives at the hands of human settlers either. On the periphery of wildlife habitat many a majestic beast, too often, gets tragically beaten to death. The most recent was the gruesome attack on an elephant that had come foraging into a village in Chittagong. Berserk men fell on the poor animal with all kinds of sharp and heavy weapons, leaving it to die miserably of its wounds. Ought not such acts of cruelty be treated as crimes of the highest order?
For the wildlife conservation act to have any meaning the authorities concerned should work out a mechanism to stop thoughtless men from treating animals so mercilessly, After all, it is the pressure of population that is at fault for the shrinking habitat of Bangladesh's wildlife. The Bangladesh Resource Centre for Indigenous Knowledge (BARCIK), which has been working with forest people for an empathetic interface between wildlife conservation and people's livelihoods, should take up this issue urgently.
This research-oriented centre stands against self-seeking groups and organisations that are holding the forest people hostage on the pretext of helping them, and since 2008, it has been steadfast in its efforts to secure the rights of the forest people to exploit their own natural resources sustainably. BARCIK is also working for more coordination between the forest department and forest people's livelihoods; and the study, conservation and dissemination of indigenous knowledge and wisdom.
The attitude of genuine forest people towards the wildlife around them is one of 'live and let live,' and if their rules -- not to encroach on the space of the beautiful beasts -- are followed, there are bound to be fewer casualties on both sides. The 10 November 2010 gazette notification regarding compensation for people who have been attacked by wild animals, provides from Taka 25 to a 100 thousand for various degrees of damage, starting from destruction of crop, cattle and homestead, to loss of limb and loss of life. But the sums are payable only to those who are legally registered as foragers and if applications are made on specified form within 30 days of the incidence. A report by the 'investigation committee' proving the bona fide of the incident would also be required. The forest people are reportedly happy to learn about the compensation provisions and demanded that this information be disseminated as widely as required.
Although governments have been collecting revenue from the forests, the rights and responsibilities of the indigenous people have received only perfunctory attention. The Forest (Amendment) Act 2010 has reportedly been drafted to rectify these gaps, hopefully with the inputs of the people whose livelihoods are deeply involved. A truly inclusive Forest Act is called for, based on the scientific enhancement of the native knowledge. Exclusion is particularly acute for the females of the forests, under the prevailing socio-cultural conventions that, like the rest of the country, prioritize male needs in ways that are prejudicial to women's well-being and security. Thus, when men fall to the tiger's jaws the poor widows are blamed and ostracized for causing the ill luck! These aspects need to be addressed sooner rather than later so that the compensation provisions do not bypass women.
For the wildlife conservation act to have any meaning the authorities concerned should work out a mechanism to stop thoughtless men from treating animals so mercilessly, After all, it is the pressure of population that is at fault for the shrinking habitat of Bangladesh's wildlife. The Bangladesh Resource Centre for Indigenous Knowledge (BARCIK), which has been working with forest people for an empathetic interface between wildlife conservation and people's livelihoods, should take up this issue urgently.
This research-oriented centre stands against self-seeking groups and organisations that are holding the forest people hostage on the pretext of helping them, and since 2008, it has been steadfast in its efforts to secure the rights of the forest people to exploit their own natural resources sustainably. BARCIK is also working for more coordination between the forest department and forest people's livelihoods; and the study, conservation and dissemination of indigenous knowledge and wisdom.
The attitude of genuine forest people towards the wildlife around them is one of 'live and let live,' and if their rules -- not to encroach on the space of the beautiful beasts -- are followed, there are bound to be fewer casualties on both sides. The 10 November 2010 gazette notification regarding compensation for people who have been attacked by wild animals, provides from Taka 25 to a 100 thousand for various degrees of damage, starting from destruction of crop, cattle and homestead, to loss of limb and loss of life. But the sums are payable only to those who are legally registered as foragers and if applications are made on specified form within 30 days of the incidence. A report by the 'investigation committee' proving the bona fide of the incident would also be required. The forest people are reportedly happy to learn about the compensation provisions and demanded that this information be disseminated as widely as required.
Although governments have been collecting revenue from the forests, the rights and responsibilities of the indigenous people have received only perfunctory attention. The Forest (Amendment) Act 2010 has reportedly been drafted to rectify these gaps, hopefully with the inputs of the people whose livelihoods are deeply involved. A truly inclusive Forest Act is called for, based on the scientific enhancement of the native knowledge. Exclusion is particularly acute for the females of the forests, under the prevailing socio-cultural conventions that, like the rest of the country, prioritize male needs in ways that are prejudicial to women's well-being and security. Thus, when men fall to the tiger's jaws the poor widows are blamed and ostracized for causing the ill luck! These aspects need to be addressed sooner rather than later so that the compensation provisions do not bypass women.