Report on Collaborative Management of Protected Areas and Forests Workshop

22 and 23 February 2010, Mysore

Scope of the workshop

ATREE organized a workshop in which various stakeholders - community organizations, civil society organizations and the Forest Department - came together to discuss, debate and share their perceptions, ideas and thoughts on the implementation of the Forest Rights Act.

The workshop began with revisiting some of the key points of the Forest Rights Act, 2006. In particular, section 3(1)(i) that stipulates recognising the rights of local communities to protect, regenerate and conserve community forests which they have traditionally used and conserved for sustainable use, was brought to focus.

The emphasis in the introductory session was on the Act’s unique features like decentralized decision making, management and governance. In this arrangement the Gram Sabhas are empowered to make decisions regarding determination and implementation of rights, as well as the management and conservation of forests resources. Gram Sabhas are to be seen not as implementing agencies but as decision making bodies. The session also dealt with the need to distinguish between management and governance. While management is about what is being done about a particular protected area or situation, governance is about who makes these decisions and how.

Decision making with regard to conservation issues is no more the sole prerogative of the Forest Department but rests with the Gram Sabha. This does not mean that the role of the Forest Department is diminished; only redefined. Given the far reaching implications of this law, the Ministry of Environment and Forests has appointed an expert committee to study the impacts of the implementation of the Act. Among others, the ‘Terms of Reference’ of the committee includes redefining the role of the Forest Department vis-à-vis the Gram Sabha.

This session also touched upon the fact that despite the Act and its rules there was still some ambiguity on the role of communities and the Forest Department and it was hoped that such a workshop would be useful to clarify such issues and result in better implementation of the Act.

This was the first time that stakeholders came together on the same platform to discuss issues pertaining to forest rights and conservation. More than 30 community and civil society organizations working in this field from across the state took part to share their perspectives. Forest officials from several national parks, sanctuaries and forest areas in various districts of Karnataka also took part in the discussions, as well as groups from the neighbouring states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu. The presentations raised several issues and concerns for further consideration.

NGO Views
While the community groups and civil society organizations were happy that at last there is recognition of their forest rights and their role in conservation, most of them expressed concern at the delay in implementation of the Act. Issues such as what rights are being claimed as community forest rights; how the rights claims are being determined, the processes and problems associated with this was discussed.

Many community organizations complained that they were unable to get forms for claiming forest rights. They faced difficulty in getting necessary supporting documents like maps, records of their traditional practices etc. Others complained about the fact that there is lack of awareness and understanding among the various government agencies which were involved in the implementation of the Act. They further felt that these departments lacked coordination among themselves which caused avoidable delays. It was felt that it is important to provide government staff necessary training so that the implementation can be more effective.

It was reiterated that communities can play a major role in protection and conservation of forests. The Act with its focus on rights and duties redefines the role of communities, Gram Sabha and the Forest Department in chalking out context-specific collaborative management initiatives. The communities have to assume greater responsibility and move from being mere beneficiaries to decision makers. Using the Right to Information was stressed upon, to get necessary information on the status of implementation of the Act. Other issues flagged by NGOs included:

  • Eviction of communities for conservation has to be stalled and their rights be settled.
  • Need to recognize their rights and to revive their traditional institutions, revitalize their traditional knowledge, skills and protect their culture.
  • There is confusion about what rights can be claimed under the Act and the determination process.

Adivasi Views
Community leaders from various adivasi communities expressed their disappointment over the delay in the implementation of the Act. Many community groups resented the fact that they were not given land for farming. They complained about the inappropriate surveys being done in which only their dwelling places were surveyed and not the lands they farmed. Some of the community members were of the opinion that each and every member is eligible for 10 acres of land. This was clarified -- that upto a maximum of 10 acres can be given as per rights under the Act, but subject to proof of current holdings. Another issue that received attention was the permission to collect and use non timber forest products. In principle, there was agreement that as part of implementation this issue would get resolved, and communities would get their rights to NTFP collection and sale restored.

The state monitoring committee which is responsible for overseeing the entire process has met only twice since it was formed, said Mr. Jadeswamy, an adivasi representative on the committee. He pointed out that there is lack of information, awareness and training among government officials as well as within communities.

Other problems highlighted include:

  • The communities lack information regarding the forest rights, the claims that can be made and the determination process.
  • In many places the Gram Sabha was not at all constituted. In some places they were not constituted at the hamlet level.<
  • li>
  • In many places its powers were taken over by powerful interests.

Forest Department Views
The officials present at the workshop delved on the point that if conservation has to succeed, the cooperation of local communities is crucial. The DCF, Chamarajanagara, pointed out, “These forest dwelling communities are not a threat; rather they are partners in the management and conservation of forests.” He also pointed out the ‘trust deficit’ between the Forest Department officials and local communities. The example of BRT was cited to drive the point about the vital role communities can play in protecting forests against forest fires, etc. It was reiterated that communities have to be involved and taken into confidence for better management and conservation. However the DCF of BRT promised that with the matter of implementation of the Act in sanctuaries and national parks being clarified, he hoped that BRT could be the first sanctuary in the state to get individual and community rights.

The DCF, Nagarhole, dwelt upon the initial lack of clarity among forest officials on whether the law applies to sanctuaries, national parks and tiger reserves. He stressed the need for transparency and accountability. Strengthening village level institutions would bring about greater transparency in functioning.

Department officials pointed out existing institutions like Eco Development Committees and the need to strengthen them in adjudication to the communities’ conservation role. The DCF of Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary pointed to the need to explore possibilities of ways in which various developmental goals like health, sanitation, education and electricity can complement each other. Officials including the DCF Mysore pointed out that different laws at different times have created confusion and resulted in lack of clarity in interpreting these laws and their resulting implementation. Therefore they were of the opinion that clear guidelines for implementation from the higher authorities should be provided.

RFRA Implementation Issues
Some of the issues which were discussed at length were:

  • What rights can be claimed under community forest rights?
  • What is the process of determination of these rights?
  • What is the role and powers of the Gram Sabha in implementing these rights?
  • Does the Gram Sabha have powers to penalize violators?

Mr. Tushar Dash of Vasundhara, an organization in Orissa that is actively involved in working for community forest rights, shared some experiences with regard to the aspects mentioned above. Some 216 community forest claims have already been settled in the state.

The communities can claim right to medicinal plants, bio resources, and intellectual property rights thereof; traditional knowledge systems and skills related to medicine, agricultural practices; any other traditional practices such as forest passages, festivals, religious practices pertaining to biodiversity and even the soil used for painting their houses. It is important to understand that the law is very flexible and one must consider the rich diversity of community knowledge and practices relating to biodiversity while making the claims.

Under the Act, the authority to manage these community conserved areas rests with the Gram Sabha. So the Gram Sabhas have the power as well as responsibility in the implementation of these rights. They process the claims, verify them and recommend them for settlement. Hence the communities have the responsibility of making sure that these Gram Sabhas are properly constituted and function in a democratic and effective manner.

There was consensus that such a workshop was useful in sorting contentious issues, clarifying roles of stakeholders and fostering a better understanding of the Act.

Recommendations from the workshop included the following:

  1. There is a need to inform, educate and train local communities about the Forest Rights Act, especially with regard to the claims, rights determination process and institutions. The communities must be empowered and trained to use techniques such as GPS for preparing maps.
  2. There is a need for coordination among government departments like forest, revenue and social welfare. There is also a need to train government officials, especially field level staff involved in implementation.
  3. Need to constitute forest rights committee at the hamlet level.
  4. The State Level Monitoring Committee needs to meet more frequently and needs to monitor the implementation of the Act. It should send circulars to all district administrations seeking current progress and status of implementation.
  5. Need for extensive media campaign regarding forest rights.
  6. The Gram Sabha must be provided with a permanent office premises out of which it can function. It needs to have the necessary support staff to enable it to function smoothly. If necessary, the idea of training some office bearers of the Gram Sabha was also mooted.
  7. The Forest Department must undertake all its programmes through the Gram Sabha only.
  8. There should be a ban on displacement and rehabilitation of local communities for at least five years.
  9. Those who are already farming in the forests should be allowed to continue with their farming activities.
  10. The communities must meet more frequently to share their experiences.
  11. A delegation of community leaders, civil society organizations should meet the Chief Minister to apprise him of the current situation and seek assurances to speed up the process and seek necessary help from the state government.
  12. The government should appoint nodal officers from various departments like the forest, revenue and social welfare to ascertain the implementation of the Act.
  13. It is important that the culture and traditions of the indigenous communities are acknowledged and respected.

Action Plan
The workshop evolved a four-point action plan as a follow up:

  1. That the community and civil society organizations visit all local communities and apprise them of the current status on forest rights, and also provide all necessary information for claiming their rights.
  2. Meet the district level officials and discuss with them the problems relating to implementation of forest rights.
  3. The state level committee must correspond with the government at all levels and ascertain progress.
  4. Undertake a tour to Orissa to see and gain firsthand information on the progress made in that state on forest rights.