Destabilising Factors:
"Scientific Forestry" took the form of conversion of accessible, fertile and well-watered areas to monoculture, especially teak initially. The innovation introduced destructive forces -contractors, large scale felling of natural vegetation, disturbance to wild life, edaphic changes by roads and other structures, etc. After planting, the area was let out for ‘taungya' cultivation, with further disturbance, and propagation of weeds like Lantana and Eupatorium. Worst of all, it curtailed available area for shifting cultivation driving it to the steeper, less suitable areas. These consequences were further strengthened when Government inundated large areas under water bodies of hydel/irrigation structures. In Southern States, exposed surfaces tended to become laterised. Non-tribal encroachers grabbed the best and most productive areas along river valleys. For three decades after Independence, Forest Policy was designed to satisfy industrial demand for subsidised timber. Forests were denuded for formation of eucalyptus and other ‘fast growing' species. Encroachment of forestland and poaching became widespread. As the enforcement of laws against hunting and trapping became stricter, the people were forced to adopt settled cultivation. "Settlers" descended in hordes, encroached, destroyed forests, and decimated wild life.
The Fundamental Equation
Man as an animal, though no longer a denizen of forests, still depends on them. Many continue to be forest-dwellers. The ‘efficiency' of agriculture is no longer judged by maximization of yield of specific crops per unit of land area. The fundamental equation of land use, especially in forested areas therefore has to relate to edaphic conditions to be preserved with minimum disturbance, biotic equity, and human welfare.
Edaphic Appropriateness
Nature develops landforms through geological process of stabilisation and optimisation. The appropriateness of a life form in a given edaphic situation is judged by its survivability in that environment. Human technology alters edaphic conditions, e.g., by providing irrigation in an arid area, ameliorating soil conditions by fertiliser application and tillage, levelling of slopes by various means. These alterations require continued application; otherwise natural conditions tend to react in various ways to return to as close an approximation of the original conditions as possible, often at a lower level of vegetative wealth ("bio-diversity") than before.
Biotic Equity
This is a more complex concept. No conservationist, however committed, is likely to argue for preservation and propagation of plague bacillus or small pox virus. At the other extreme, no entrepreneur, however pragmatic, will seriously urge extermination of the tiger or the elephant, though most of his priorities and practices may lead to such an eventuality.
Tribal Knowledge Base
In my view, tribal knowledge base that optimised shifting cultivation has the key to this twin solution of edaphic appropriateness and biotic equity. Like all human practices, there are "good" versions and "bad". The bad versions are those where "Scientific Forestry", hydel reservoirs, Eco-tourism enterprises, townships for forest officials, etc., have curtailed the optimisation of shifting cultivation circuits. Excessive felling of natural growth, intense tillage with invasive tools, introduction of exotic planting materials with associated pathogenic consequences; - all are elements of "bad" shifting cultivation. Conversely, the more it approaches Dig & Scratch methods, the "better" and more sustainable it is.
In the choice of technology, humans have virtually unlimited capabilities now. We can gain spectacularly by methods such as transgenic planting materials, supported by increasingly powerful plant protection chemicals and all sorts of mixtures of applied plant nutrients. But we shall pay the price of the permanent impoverishment of the poorest of our numbers, for the benefit of those who make profits out of immediate sales of "patented" technologies protected by worldwide agreements. Worse, we shall also suffer the permanent loss of productivity of our lands, and continued dependence on worldwide trade channels for our basic requirements.
Technology ultimately is a choice of objectives, methodologies, and beneficiaries. If our objective is sustainable use of our planet and what it provides, if our methodologies are minimally invasive, and if our beneficiaries are to be the poorest who most deserve the benefits most, then, our choice of technology must integrate elements of tribal wisdom, that have proven themselves by survival over millennia.
The ST (Recognition of Rights in Forest) Bill 2005
It is understood that Govt., of India propose to introduce a Bill in Parliament in belated fulfilment of the Directive Principle in Article 46 of our Constitution. It promises to "Forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes" certain minimum "Livelihood Rights" in the forests that have been their homeland since memory. Essentially, each such family is to be allotted 2.5 hectares of forestland for their sustenance. The Bill strictly prohibits hunting - it is one of the traditional rights that the Bill does not recognise and restore.
If, as is to be devoutly to be wished for, the Bill becomes law, there will be need to devise suitable technologies so that the people may be able to derive full advantage. Integration of tribal knowledge with the changing conditions will be a challenge to all practitioners of the Life Sciences. -T. Madhava Menon.
