No. 9 May 1996
NEWS FROM SPECIFIC PROTECTED AREAS
Meghalaya
Threat from cement industry to Balphakram National Park
Bittu Sahgal of Sanctuary Magazine reports that there is a proposal of the Associated Cement Corporation (ACC) to set up a cement plant near Balphakram National Park, located in the Garo hills of Meghalaya.
Cement plants, and their associated limestone mining activities, in and around protected areas are now no longer an unprecedented phenomenon in India. In 1991 the Ambuja Cement Company of Gujarat lobbied with the government of Himachal Pradesh to denotify Darlaghat Sanctuary, in order to set up a cement plant in the area. More recently, the Sanghi Cement Company of Hyderabad has begun establishing a cement plant in the area of the Narayan Sarovar Sanctuary, Gujarat, following its partial denotification from over 700 sq km to 400 sq km.
The Wildlife Protection Society of India has prepared a report on the Balphakram case. In the event of ACC going ahead with its proposed plans in Balphakram National Park, a national campaign to boycott ACC cement is being considered.
For further details, or if any reader has additional information, please contact : Bittu Sahgal, Sanctuary Magazine, 602 Maker Chambers V, Nariman Point, Bombay 400 021. Ph.: (022) 283 0061, 283 0061; Fax : (022) 287 4380; Email : bittu@ecologist.ilbom.ernet.in; or Ashok Kumar, Wildlife Protection Society of India, Thapar House, 124 Janpath, New Delhi 110 001. Ph: (011) 332 0573; Fax: (011) 332 7729
Uttar Pradesh
Much Ado at Rajaji National Park
The last few months have seen a spate of activities at Rajaji National Park:
(i) On 24-25 February the Rural Litigation and Environment Kendra, Dehradun, released its proposed plan for the Gujjars of Rajaji National Park. For now only a summary has been made available for limited circulation, with comments and feedback to be incorporated into the final report. The summary, titled Community Forest Management in Protected Areas : Van Gujjar Proposals for the Rajaji Area, identifies land rights, livelihood insecurity, education, and health as being the major issues facing the Gujjars. The objectives of the plan are as follows :
1. To protect the ecosystem of the Shivaliks, conserve biodiversity, and protect and support endangered and threatened species. 2. To protect and support the rights, needs and lifestyle of the Van-Gujjars such that they can permanently live in the proposed Park in an sustainable manner. 3. To provide Van-Gujjars with the freedom to make environmentally responsible choices about their lifestyle, either inside or outside the forest. 4. To protect the traditional rights of villagers living in border areas to use forest resources in an environmentally sustainable manner. 5. To encourage villagers to take responsibility for border areas which can produce forest resources to meet their needs and development priorities. 6. To increase the documented knowledge base about the Shivalik ecosystem through partnerships between local people and external scientists and researchers. 7. To ensure and promote ecologically and culturally responsible tourism and education under the supervision of a community forest management structure.
The broad strategies to be adopted for meeting these objectives include, development of a formal Community Forest Management structure and Community Enforcement System, advocacy and support for the nomadic movement of the Gujjars, sustainable resource use by villages especially in the surrounding area, and giving priority to the development needs of the Gujjars.
Contact : Avdash Kaushal, Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra, 8 Chandralok, Behind Ajanta Hotel, Rajpur Road, Dehradun, Uttar Pradesh. Ph: (0135) 656 881, 657 630.
(ii) The Wildlife Institute of India (WII), Dehradun, is proposing to undertake a long term project, initially for two years possibly followed by another three, on Building Partnerships for Biodiversity Conservation in Rajaji National Park. The project has a strong training component for all the major stakeholders involved with the various problems affecting Rajaji, with WII playing a facilitator s role in conflict resolution. The objectives of the project are the following :
1. Capacity enhancement of Park management for conservation with people s involvement. 2. Capacity enhancement of local communities so as to minimise Park-people conflict. 3. Facilitate co-ordination amongst major stakeholders to resolve conflicts.
The strategies to be adopted to meet these objectives include Park management staff training, local community level training, local enterprise development, documentation, research and monitoring.
Contact : B.M.S. Rathore, Wildlife Institute of India, PO Box 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun 248 001, Uttar Pradesh. Ph: (0135) 640 112-15; Fax: (0135) 640 117; Email: wii.isnet@axcess.net.in.
(iii) In May 1995, the Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife), Uttar Pradesh, issued a directive regarding removal of grass from protected areas (see State News below). The Ghad Kshetra Mazdoor Sangharsh Samiti (GKMSS), a people s organisation working with the baan weavers adjacent to Rajaji National Park, wrote to the District Collector, Haridwar, urging him to implement the provisions of the CCFs directive, besides making further suggestions to involve local communities in the management of the Park. The organisation has pointed out the fact that copies of this government order have yet to be made available to local organisations or people, and inspite of it contractors, rather than people from villages, are being allowed to extract bhabbar grass (Eulopsis binata) from the Park area. The GKMSS proposal recommends the following:
1. The system of haqdari (customary rights) to be reinstated in the Park area, with certain responsibilities of local communities, to ensure conservation, added on. 2. Permission to extract bhabbar grass to be given exclusively to local communities for whom it is a means of livelihood, rather than contractors of the Forest Development Corporation whose interest is purely commercial. 3. The system of haqdari rammana (rightholder's permit) and aam rammana (general permit) should be reinstated to ensure removal of left over grass in the summer months when the risk of accidental fire is maximum. 4. Local forest protection committees to be organised with 50% membership reserved exclusively for women. The forest protection committees to function within a structure of decision making at the village, range, and Park level. The multi-agency team, as recommended in Justice P.S. Poti s report on Rajaji, to be set up. 5. The cutting and distribution of bhabbar to be done through local people s co-operatives. 6. Identified haqdari holders to be given identity cards to facilitate monitoring of the activity. 7. The system of contractors and contract labour in Rajaji to be abolished altogether. 8. A tripartite board to be set up consisting of local organisations, the Park authorities and the District authorities to plan and implement developmental activities for the region. 9. Local communities and organisations must be kept informed of all new proposals, schemes and funds, related to Rajaji National Park.
Contact : Ghad Kshetra Mazdoor Sangharsh Samiti, Village Buggawala, via Biharigarh, District Haridwar, Uttar Pradesh; or Ashok Chaudhuri / Roma, Vikalp Social Organisation, 11 Mangal Nagar, Saharanpur 247 001, Uttar Pradesh. Ph: (0132) 724 507
Karnataka
Critique of Nagarahole eco-development plan
Anita Cheria, involved with tribal organisations in southern Karnataka, has prepared a critique of the eco-development plan for Nagarahole National Park. This plan is part of a larger exercise which is scheduled for funding from the Global Environmental Facility of UNDP/UNEP/World Bank, and which includes another 6 protected areas in India. The critique alleges that the plan does not respect the rights of local tribals living inside the park, nor takes them along as full-fledged partners in conservation and development. Armed with this critique, Cheria made a deposition at a GEF-NGO consultation held in Washington on April 1, 1996, demanding that the plan be translated and discussed with the local tribal organisation (Buddakattu Krishikara Sangha), tribals be involved at all levels of the plan including the steering committee, and other NGOs active in the area (CORD, DEED, FEDINA-VIKASA) be consulted. She reports that the response from GEF members, and from the World Bank team involved with the project, whom she later met, was "positive".
A copy of the critique and more details can be obtained from Anita or Edwin at: c/o BCO, 658, 45th Cross, II 'A' Main, V Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore 560041. Ph: (080) 663 5622; Fax: (080) 663 3538; Email: admin@bco.frlht.ernet.in.
Rajasthan
Field visit to Kailadevi Sanctuary
Between 24-27 February 1996, a team of researchers from IIPA made a field visit to Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary, one of three cases that have been taken up in the project on Participatory Management of Protected Areas (as reported in previous JPAM Updates). The team interacted with villagers residing in and around the Sanctuary. The villages were selected with the help of Arun Jindal of the Society of Sustainable Development, based at Karauli in Sawai Madhopur district, who has been actively working with local communities in the area for some time.
The objective of this field visit was to familiarise the research team with the study area, and to get some idea of the dependence of local people on the resources within the Sanctuary, and of the reported moves by the villages to protect the forests (please refer to the detailed report on Kailadevi in JPAM Update 5).
The research team is currently putting together information on Kailadevi Sanctuary. Readers aware of sources may kindly write in to: Priya Das, c/o Ashish Kothari (see address at end).
Participatory Management Plan For Keoladeo National Park
A Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) exercise was organised by WWF-India in several villages around Keoladeo National Park, Bharatpur, between November 20-December 5, 1995. The objectives were to gauge the people's perception of the Park and their use of its resources, and to facilitate a dialogue between people and the Park authorities in its management..
The exercise, in which officials, NGO members, and villagers participated, involved classroom sessions, followed by field exercises in the villages. Information was also gathered from the rickshaw pullers inside the park, tourists, forest guards, grass cutters and hoteliers in Bharatpur.
Grazing and fodder needs, crop damage by wild herbivores, water problems and unemployment were some of the main problems confronting local communities. Suggested solutions included a system of annual permits for fodder collection, fuelwood permits, strengthening and raising of the boundary wall around the wetland, revenue sharing and schemes for water management. WWF-I is preparing a detailed report, which can help to evolve a participatory management plan.
Contact: Parikshit Gautam, World Wide Fund for Nature - India, 172 B Lodi Estate, New Delhi 110 003. Ph: (011) 461 6532, 469 3744, 462 7586; Fax: (011) 462 6837; Email: wwfindel@unv.ernet.in.
Mining threatens Jamva Ramgarh Sanctuary
Information received from Tarun Bharat Sangh, a local NGO working in the Alwar district of Rajasthan, indicates that at least 40 marble mines are currently operating within the boundaries of the 300 sq.km. Jamva Ramgarh Sanctuary. While the largest mine is 10 sq. km. in size, most other mines cover an area of less than 2.5 ha., and operate on 10-20 year leases. The lease period of most mines is over, and permission for renewal has not been granted by the Forest Department, yet they continue to operate under the orders of either the state government or under a stay from the Rajasthan High Court. What is disturbing is that many of the mine-owners, mostly private, were given leases for mining after declaration of the Sanctuary, making a mockery of the state government's intention to protect the area for its wildlife. This is probably also a violation of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980.
In addition to the destruction of forests and land, the associated blasting, dumping of debris, road- construction, movement of vehicles, and employment of large labour- force, all contribute to the disturbance and destruction of the area's wildlife. According to records available with local Forest officials, many of the mine-owners have been fined large sums of money for dumping debris on forest land; yet they continue to operate with impunity.
Furthermore, it has been alleged that violations of the Code of Conduct for the Lok Sabha elections may also be taking place in the area. Significantly, Shri Rajesh Pilot, Minister of State for Environment and Forests, is a Congress-I candidate from Dausa electoral constituency, which covers Jamva Ramgarh Sanctuary. Mine owners are bringing pressure on the state government to denotify the Sanctuary, and large sums of money, to the tune of crores of rupees, may have been offered for this. Local people have been threatened by mine owners to cast their votes in the Lok Sabha elections only in favour of Pilot, who will allegedly ensure the mines are kept running following the elections and therefore lead to development of the region. As of March 12, 1996, the Rajasthan. Recent information received from a coalition of NGOs in Rajasthan suggests that there may be a move to denotify Jamva Ramgarh Sanctuary by the state government.
The coalition, which has filed a complaint with T.N. Seshan, the Chief Election Commissioner, consists of the following organisations: Adhunik Welfare Society, Jaipur; Rashtriya Yuva Parishad, Jaipur; Tarun Bharat Sangh, Bhikampura-Kishori; and Society for Promotion of Environment and Sustainable Development, Jaipur.
Contact: Rajendra Singh, Tarun Bharat Singh, Village Bhikampura-Kishori, Via Thanagazi, District Alwar, Rajasthan 301 002. Ph: (014652) 4443.
Bihar
Field visit to Dalma Sanctuary
A field visit to Dalma Sanctuary was undertaken as part of IIPA's project on Participatory Management of Protected Areas, from 1-6 March, 1996 (for project details, pl. see previous JPAM Updates). Besides Dalma Sanctuary, the team also visited Jamshedpur and Ranchi, and Gobarghusi town. Meetings were held with local farmers, fuelwood head loaders, Forest Department officials and guards, and representatives of local NGOs. The aim of the visit was to obtain a profile of the Sanctuary, its management, and local communities dependent on it. Further visits to the area are planned for the coming months and a workshop involving all stakeholders has also been proposed. A detailed field visit report has been prepared and is being circulated for comments.
Contact: K. Christopher, c/o Ashish Kothari (see address at end).
Gujarat
Bamboo extraction recommences in Shoolpaneshwar Sanctuary
Action Research and Community Health and Development (ARCH), a local NGO based in Mangrol on the banks of the Narmada, has sent in information on bamboo felling in Shoolpaneshwar Sanctuary. The 110 sq. km. Sanctuary is mostly degraded forest land, and was created in compensation for partial submergence of forests north of it, by the Sardar Sarovar Dam. Apparently restrictions have been imposed by the Director of the Forest Development Corporation on employment generation schemes for villages inside the Sanctuary under the Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS) and Minimum Wage Programme (MWP). This has been done on the pretext that activities under these schemes may be detrimental to the interests of wildlife conservation. However, since February 1996, bamboo is being extracted for the Central Paper and Pulp Mills, owned by the J.K. Industries group, with the argument that the clearings produced by this are good for wild herbivores!
Two local organisations, Adivasi Vikas Vahini and ARCH-Vahini, organised a demonstration outside the Piplod Forest Range Office at Dediapada, on 22 April, to protest against the double standards being adopted by Forest Department.
Contact : Anil Patel, ARCH-Vahini, P.O. Mangrol 393 150, Taluk Rajpipla, District Bharuch, Gujarat. Ph: (02640) 401 40, 401 54 or (0265) 421 246
STATE/REGIONAL NEW
Uttar Pradesh
In May 1995, the Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife), UP, issued a directive (no. 719/12-1 dated 8/5/95) on measures proposed to tackle fire hazards, in parks and sanctuaries and other forest areas, during the summer months. It was addressed to senior UP Forest Department officials and Field Directors of Corbett and Dudhwa Tiger Reserves, Rajaji National Park, and Nandadevi Biosphere Reserve.
The directive enables the Forest Department to undertake the following: 1. Dead and fallen trees may be removed, from sanctuaries only, before February 1996, in as short a time-span as possible. 2. In January-February 1996, grass may be removed from national parks and sanctuaries in the interest of wildlife conservation, by local communities who have had customary rights to do so in the past. 3. These activities will be taken up under supervision of senior Forest Department officials. 4. In Dudhwa National Park, eucalyptus plantations will also be thinned, under the provisions of point 1 above.
NGOs in Rajaji have already taken up the matter (see News from Specific Areas above).
Contact: Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife), Forest Department, 17 Rana Pratap Marg, Lucknow 226 001, Uttar Pradesh. Ph: (0522) 248 397; Fax: (0522) 232 770.
NATIONAL NEWS
Committee on Wildlife Conservation, Protection and Laws
In July 1995, under directions from the High Court, the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) had constituted a seven member committee on Wildlife Conservation, Protection and Laws, under the chairpersonship of Shri M.F. Ahmed, Inspector General of Forests, MoEF. The Committee submitted its final report in February 1996. The Committee has made the following major recommendations:
1. Creation of a new ministry at the Centre, exclusively for wildlife conservation. 2. Statutory status for the Indian Board for Wildlife (IBWL). 3. Expanding the coverage of the existing PA network from 4.52% to 7% by 2000 AD, taking suggestions from Wildlife Institute of India for the creation of additional PAs. 4. Expansion of PA categories such as those in IUCN's list. 5. Setting up of advisory councils with village and panchayat representatives, to suggest ways of involving local communities in management of PAs. 6. Setting up of a wildlife cell' in each state police headquarters to combat poaching. 7. Establishing an intelligence network for undercover investigations on wildlife related cases.
The report has detailed recommendations pertaining to People, Wildlife and Forests':
1. Priority to be given to harmonizing relationship with forest communities, through intensive discussions, and ecological development and sensible land use regulation outside PAs. 2. Creation of an advisory council made up of village representatives/panchayat who can participate and be involved in management and protection of the area. 3. Immediate assessment of the relevance of traditional knowledge for conservation and its incorporation into the management of wildlife habitats. 4. Mechanisms to assess the adverse impacts of wildlife on crops and livestock; mechanisms for effective compensation and means to check such impacts. 5. Mechanisms to assess as well as spread awareness of the benefits that accrue from forests and wildlife in terms of conservation. 6. Reorientation of all staff (PA and forest), to sensitize them to tribal culture. 7. Rapid surveys to assess damage caused by anti-conservation activities and offer immediate corrective and alternative measures. 8. Well planned voluntary relocation programmes that make provision for : (i) Reduction of human and livestock pressures in critical habitat, (ii) Compensation by the government, and (iii) Utilization of Long-Term Compensation Scheme (LTCS)'. 9. New and innovative land use policies outside key habitats for reduction of dependency on critical wildlife habitat. 10. Viability of low impact eco-tourism, for revenue generation, to be assessed. 11. Effective management and land-use of multiple use areas for enhancement of connective corridors between wild populations, ensuring genetic pools. 12. Assessment of eco-development schemes in order to prevent counter-productive results. 13. Generation of tangible benefits to the local people, from PAs, as an incentive for conservation. Some income generated from controlled tourism should be utilized for development and improvement of traditional lifestyles.
Contact: M.F. Ahmed, Inspector-General of Forests, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodi Estate, New Delhi 110 003. Ph: (011) 436 1669.
Committee to review Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972
The Committee set up by the Ministry of Environment and Forests to examine changes needed in the Wild Life Act (see also earlier reports in JPAM Updates 7&8) met with NGOs on March 15 in Delhi. Among the groups which made presentations were: VIKSAT (Ahmedabad, Gujarat); Vikalp (Saharanpur, UP); Karnataka Rajya Moolnivasi Budakattu Janara Vedike and Joint Tribal Action Committee Karnataka (coalitions of several NGOs working with tribals); Indian Social Institute, Kalpavriksh, IIPA, Centre for Environmental Law/WWF-I, and Ranthambhore Foundation (all New Delhi). The discussions were free and frank, with NGOs stressing that the Act as it exists today is too restrictive, allowing neither a central role to local communities in the management of conservation areas, nor adequate opportunities to pursue their livelihood. Other lacunae regarding the weakness of the Act to counter destructive commercial forces, and to curb poaching, were also pointed out. A number of constructive suggestions were made. Though reluctant to accept the full implications of the NGOs viewpoints, the Committee appeared open, and requested that concrete changes be recommended in writing. It was also agreed that it would not rush through with its deliberations, and would consider holding regional meetings to obtain a greater cross-representation than was possible sitting in Delhi.
Summaries of written submissions from some of the NGOs are presented below: (i) The National Committee for the Protection of Common Land Resources (NCPCLR), a coalition of NGOs, has strongly urged the committee to integrate the interests and needs of local communities in the strategies for wildlife conservation. It has reproduced the recommendations for specific changes in the Act which were made by advocate B.J. Krishnan (see JPAM Update 7).
Contact: B.J. Krishnan, President, Save Nilgiris Campaign, Nahar Building, Charing Cross, Ootacamund 643 001, Tamil Nadu
(ii) Wildlife First!, a Bangalore based NGO has sent a strong note in favour of strengthening the Act in the interests of wildlife conservation, and sees any attempt to dilute it as spelling the "death knell of many of our wildlife reserves". The organisation would like to see all exploitation of natural resources from PAs, especially to meet commercial demands, terminated forthwith. Any efforts by the state or NGOs to provide basic services and development inputs such as promotion of agriculture, animal husbandry, roads, electricity, education, health care, etc. to local communities within PAs would only serve to disrupt and fragment wildlife populations and habitats. Wildlife First! urges that human populations within PAs should be resettled and absorbed, "intelligently, humanely and fairly" into areas outside. The organisation is also in favour of protective policing of PAs while supporting wildlife protection staff, who are expected to work under difficult conditions without much motivation or support.
Contact: V. Krishna Prasad, Wildlife First!, 248, 4th Main Road, Chamarajapet, Bangalore - 560 018. Ph: (080) 662 1544; Fax: (080) 661 2936.
(iii) On behalf of the IIPA JPAM team, four submissions were given in. One pointed out that the thrust of the proposed changes in the Act should be to ensure a role for local communities in managing and receiving benefits from PAs while keeping out destructive commercial and urban-industrial activities. A second, done by Ashish Kothari and Neema Pathak, suggested some concrete changes in specific clauses of the Act. A third laid out a broad strategy of involving local communities in PA management, suggesting concrete additions to the Act such as the creation of local-level management boards. The fourth one suggested ways to keep destructive pressures out of PAs, by various alternative legal methods including compulsory public scrutiny of proposed developmental and commercial projects, and a double clearance process involving the state and central governments. Copies of these submissions are available on request.
Contact: Ashish Kothari (address at end).
(iv) Karnataka Rajya Moolnivasi Budakattu Janara Vedike and Tribal Joint Action Committee Karnataka organised three meetings through February-March in Karnataka to get representations from local organisations, especially those working with tribals in around PAs. The major thrust of their recommendations is to expand the coverage of the Act from only wildlife to all biodiversity, overhauling the functioning of the Forest Department, involvement of tribals in the management of national parks and sanctuaries, continuation of tribal ways of living even in national parks and acknowledgement of their customary rights, implementation of the provisions of the 1988 Forest Policy and the Bhuria Committee Report.
For further details regarding the Committee's progress, please contact: Kishore Rao, Additional Director (WL), Ministry of Environment and Forests, Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodi Estate, New Delhi 110 003. Ph:(011) 436 0957.
Wildlife Working Group on IXth Five Year Plan allocations for wildlife conservation
A Working Group was constituted in February 1996 by the Planning Commission, to review the various schemes initiated in the Wildlife sector of the VIIIth 5-year Plan, and recommend appropriate schemes and budgets for the IXth Plan. The Group consists of officials of the Ministry of Environment and Forests and state wildlife wings, and members of groups like the Bombay Natural History Society, SACON, Wildlife Institute of India, and IIPA.
Wildlife schemes under the earlier Plan included Development of National Parks and Sanctuaries, Eco-development, Project Tiger, Project Elephant, Control of Poaching and Illegal Trade, Strengthening Wildlife Division, Tribal Rehabilitation from protected areas. Unfortunately, no systematic review of the success or otherwise of these schemes is available, so one essential part of the Group's Terms of Reference was not fulfilled. In view of this, and in view of the widespread evidence of many funded projects being mishandled at state and local levels, some members justifiably raised doubts, and stressed that carrying on with these schemes without a review was simply 'business as usual'. In addition, the rush with which these schemes and allocations were being decided (the Group had merely two months!) was not conducive to any form of public consultation.
With regard to protected areas, the following observations and recommendations were made by IIPA JPAM team member Ashish Kothari, as a member of the Working Group: (i) Revision of the scheme on Development of National Parks and Sanctuaries' to consider means to integrate much greater scientific, traditional, and socio-economic information into the planning and management of PAs, identify major threatening factors in each PA, and identify ways to integrate traditional human uses and knowledge into management; (ii) Starting a new scheme to expand the categories of Pas (including people-protected and multiple-use areas), and accordingly identify new areas (and review earlier ones) for declaration; (iii) Starting a new scheme on Participatory Management of Protected Areas, including the creation of participatory management boards in each PA; (iv) Reorientation of the Eco-development scheme to include coordination of overall land-use around PAs; (v) Starting a new scheme on Relocation of Urban-industrial and Large Development Projects from PAs. Kothari stressed that existing schemes on relocation of tribals from PAs, and a new proposed thrust to settle rights of people inside PAs, would not be acceptable in the current framework, since they involved forcible eviction and undemocratic processes of settlement. They would be justified only within a framework of genuine participatory management, in which local communities have full powers and rights as equal partners.
The final recommendations of the Working Group are currently under preparation, and will be considered by the Planning Commission. What finally comes out as part of the IXth Plan is anyone's guess, at this stage. We will keep readers updated.
Meanwhile, for further details, please contact: Kishore Rao (see above, Wild Life Act Committee).
INTERNATIONAL NEWS
Uganda Workshop Report
As reported in JPAM Update 7, a workshop on Collaborative Management of Protected Areas in Uganda was organised at Mbale, Uganda, in October 1995. IIPA JPAM team member Ashish Kothari, who participated as a facilitator, was also given the responsibility of preparing the short and full reports of the workshop. A draft report of the complete deliberations has been prepared with help from Saloni Suri, and sent to the organisers (Uganda National Parks and IUCN). Readers interested in receiving the final reports can contact IUCN.
Contact: Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend, Social Policy Service, IUCN-The World Conservation Union, 28 Rue Mauverney, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland. Ph: (41 22) 999 0001; Fax: (41 22) 999 0025; Email: gbf@hq.iucn.ch.
UPCOMING
Starting with this issue, we are starting a column on upcoming events. Readers are invited to send in information on any events related to protected areas which may be of interest, which they would like announced here.
Collaborative Management Workshop : A two day workshop (21-22 May, 1996) is being organised at Murree, Pakistan, hosted by IUCN Pakistan, on Collaborative Management (CM) for Conservation in South Asia. The workshop will comprise informal exchanges of experiences from various countries, as well identification of key lessons, issues, opportunities and potential for initiatives on CM in South Asia.
Contact : Grazia Borrini - Feyerabend (as above).
Workshop on Community-Based Protected Area Management : The Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), New Delhi, is organising a three day workshop on Community Based Protected Area Management, scheduled from 22nd July, 1996 in New Delhi.
Contact: Ravi Sharma, Centre for Science and Environment, 41 Tughlakabad Institutional Area, New Delhi - 110062. Ph: (011) 698 1110, 698 1124, 698 3394, 698 6399; Fax : (011) 698 5879, Email: cse @ unv. ernet. in
Regional Workshop on Community Based Conservation : Principles and Practice : The Indian Institute of Public Administration is organising a workshop for the South and Central Asian region, on the principles and practices relating to community involvement in conservation. The workshop is sponsored by UNESCO. It will be held in Delhi on 9-11 February, 1997.
Contact: Ashish Kothari (see address at end).
WHAT'S AVAILABLE?
As of this issue, we are starting a new column on material related to JPAM. Readers are invited to send in any relevant material (including the print and electronic media), or references to such material, for inclusion in this column.
Sarkar, S., Singh, N., Suri, S., and Kothari, A. 1995. Joint Protected Area Management in India: Report of a Workshop. Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi.
A report of the proceedings of the Workshop on the subject, held in IIPA in September 1994. Its 100 pages contain the deliberations, a summary of major issues and recommendations emerging at the end of the Workshop, a list of papers, and a list of participants.
Available from : Indian Institute of Public Administration (see address at end). Rs. 50 or $5.
World Wide Fund for Nature - India. 1994. Seminar on Biodiversity Conservation: Proceedings. Proceedings of the First National Conservation Congress, 21-23 November 1994.
Includes all papers presented at the Congress, including on Bhitarkanika Sanctuary (Orissa), Dudhwa Tiger Reserve (UP), Manas Tiger Reserve (Assam), Marine National Park (Gujarat), and the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve (Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala).
Contact : WWF-India, 172 B, Lodhi Estate, New Delhi 110 003. No price mentioned.
Barber, Charles V. 1996. Community-Based Biodiversity Conservation : Challenges for Policy makers and Managers in Southeast Asia. Paper presented at DANCED International Meeting on Biodiversity, Chiang RAI, Thailand, 14-19 January 1996.
Reviews some of the steps taken by governments, donors, NGOs and local communities in the Southeast Asian region, to implement and support community-based biodiversity management (CBBM). Includes examples drawn from Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand. It also discusses six key issues in actually implementing initiatives on the ground.
Contact: C.V. Barber, 14 Cabbage Street, Valle Verte 5, Pasig Metro Manila, Philippines. Ph: (63-2) 631 0406; Email: cbarber@mnj.sequel.net
Manas News: Quarterly New Magazine of Manas Tiger Reserve.
Started late last year, the inaugural issue contains information on the history, biodiversity, and ongoing projects related to Manas Tiger Reserve.
Available from: Field Director, Manas Tiger Reserve, Barpeta Road 781 315, Assam. Ph: (03666) 32253. Price not mentioned.
JPAM Update is produced as a follow up to the workshop on Exploring the Possibilities of Joint Protected Area Management (JPAM), organised at IIPA, New Delhi, in Sptember 1994.
JPAM Update 9 was prepared by Priya Das, K. Christopher, Suniti K. Jha, Ashish Kothari and Farhad Vania. Ideas, comments, news and information may please be sent to Ashish Kothari, Indian Institute of Public Administration, Indraprastha Estate, New Delhi 110 002. Ph: (011) 331 7309; Fax: (011) 331 9954; Email: akothari@unv.ernet.in.
| |
Last modified on: Tue Apr 5 15:38:17 2005