One of the key issues in my book is the problem of conflicts between a conservation sense of place and local people who are focused on their own livelihoods and day-to–day lives. I showed that this is largely exaggerated, with many local people also valuing nature, but it nevertheless still a features in a number of ways, eg conflicts over house building, on-going negative attitudes to RSPB Abernethy, the Capercaillie controversy in Carrbridge. The conclusion I reached, the result of many conversations with a wide variety of people, is that the best way of ensuring that c0nservation goals, enhanced biodiversity and addressing climate change, can be effectively implemented is to have “community-led conservation”.
In his remarkable book, Irreplaceable: The Fight to Save our Wild Places, Julian Hoffman discusses a variety of examples of local people leading the way. In my last post I looked at North Kelvin Meadows in Glasgow, here I describe his chapter on the Nyishi of Arunachal Pradesh in Northeast India.
They live on the edge of the Pakke Reserve, home to tigers and elephants, and therefore are at the heart of people/wildlife conflicts. This chapter focuses on another species, the great Hornbill. They have been hunted by locals for their feathers which form an important part of their ceremonial headdress, or bopia, worn by men of the tribe and is therefore an important part of their identity. Chukhu Loma, who is from the Nyishi tribe but also works as the conservation officer for government, had an idea of how to change things: create an artificial version of the bopia. At first his proposal was meant with ridicule by fellow tribes people and he was accused of betrayal. But he persisted, appealing to the tribe’s traditional caring for the environment. This headdress is made up of fibreglass, mud and clay and is much more durable. It won support as they were beautifully made as well as more long-lasting.
Ghora-Aabha Society (GAS)- council of the village elders- oversees other environmental initiatives. It distinguishes itself from NGOs which tend to focus on a specific species and depend on funding. There work is based on the customary law of the Nyishi. It enforces laws on illegal tree felling and poaching and raises general awareness, tied in with social welfare issues. Money raised through their eco-tourism initiatives go to fund things like educational resources and self-help groups for women.
One of their main projects has been the nest adoption programme. This involves people adopting a nest and looking after it. (https://www.hornbills.in/hnap.php).
Many of the villages do not officially have the right to exist. They were moved from the forest reserve but under the Forest Act people are not allowed to live in the forest buffer zones just outside the reserves. According to Suresh, a local teacher: “This is their land”.
Takum, the chairperson of the GAS, says that this has caused great uncertainly to the tribe as these issues haven’t been resolved. We have given to conservation by moving but now you need the social welfare. “We thought Pakke Park should be saved, but for conservation to happen there and in the surrounding forest area, you need to take the community along. If we didn’t continue the conservation, what would be the point of giving up our land?” p. 331
Pahi and Tajek, two Nyshi men who had spent a life-time in the forests, were getting concerned about the decline in hornbills. They were worried that future generations would never see hornbills the way they did in their youth. They invited themselves to a gathering of Indian and foreign visitors who were discussing the reserve. This started them off on a project to find ways of acting as stewards for the forests outside of the remit of the tiger reserve. An idea was born that day- to turn hunters into protectors.
They agreed to work without a salary for the first year, receiving only a small amount of money for each hornbill nest they located. (supported by the NCF https://www.nationalconservationfoundation.org/). The GAS also travelled throughout the area to raise awareness. This became the Hornbill Nest Adoption Programme. https://www.hornbills.in/hnap.php
This works because the nest protectors are locals who know the forests intimately. They were given cameras by the NCF and were thus able to record activities of hornbills that had rarely been seen.
This conservation work has revitalised the community. It was a difficult journey because it involved changing traditional culture. Culture is crucial to stability and identity, but if aspects of that culture begin to conflict with greater needs- such as the need to protect the environment and endangered species, then it needs to change. People need to question their cultural practices to see if they are a positive one or something that causes harm.
The example here shows how culture was questioned and then modified so that there was continuation as well as positive change. Local people and ecologists worked together to preserve the integrity of a place- both for the people and the non-human species.
It is not easy to do this. There are problems with some locals getting involved in the illegal logging. It is organised by a few locals who transport workers from across the border in Assam to do the physical work. According to GAS it is people on local government contracts and it has to be people who have money as they are the only ones who could afford the equipment- so the least in need of supplementary income. “Greed not need”, according to one nest protector. This is similar to the Cairngorms and other areas in Britain as often those who already are well-off, eg property developers, construction companies, argue for development, making out that they are concerned with the welfare of the whole community, even though it is only a free who will benefit.
But it is dealing with these complexities honestly and in a way that the community can work together to decide what to do, which shows the resilience of the Nyishi and is an inspiration of what people can do if they can be fully involved in how land is used and managed.
Land for What? Land for Whom? 