Foreword by Prof. Sharad Kulkarni

“If you are born a Brahmin, you will die writing. If you are born a trader, you will die with weights and measures, but if you are born a Warli, you will be a king of forests.”

This peculiar Warli song has its equivalents in several tribal dialects. This was indeed true before the advent of the British rule in India. Land was plenty and good land was put to cultivation. The rest was covered by trees. The population was small and needs of the people were very limited. Adivasis who practiced only subsistence agriculture supplement it with hunting and gathering. Minor hunts like rabbits were readily available. Some Adivasis even consumed field rodents. They also ate all sorts of birds and the fish was available in flowing streams and ponds. These were mainly used for self consumption. There were some customary restrictions on hunting birds in certain seasons. This was to ensure protection of birds in mating seasons.

Advent of the British rule brought an end to this role of Adivasis. Asserting that conquest extinguishes all rights the government gradually increased its hold on forest resources. Forest Acts in 1865 followed by acts in 1878 and 1927 put several restrictions on the use of forest resources and the one time self-proclaimed king of forest became slaves of the Forest Department established in 1864 and expanded later on till today. Adivasis never regarded land as privately owned and had no records of ownership. Nor did they respond to the appeals made by the officials to claim and prove any rights over lands leading the government to declare all such lands as forests and government lands in the survey and settlement reports. Some British officers did point out this historic injustice which, however, went unnoticed and ignored by the government. The injustice not only continued but also gathered force in subsequent years.

Independence rectified some grievances of the tenants and tillers through Jamindari abolition and tenancy relief laws but the injustice done to forest dwelling communities went unnoticed. The working of the forest department continued as in the pre-independence days. With increasing attention to environmental issues, the subject of forests in the state list in the constitution was transferred to the concurrent list in the late seventies and Forest Conservation Acts prohibited deforestation with the previous sanction of the central government to restrict the massive transfer of lands to non-forest use for public works like irrigation and hydro-electricity projects, construction of roads and railways, public sector enterprises, mining and expansion of cities and towns. In 1980s, the government tried to practically end the dependence of tribal communities on forest resources by enacting a draconian act to replace the earlier Indian Forest Act of 1927. However, the attempt failed miserably thanks to the effective opposition by the voluntary associations and tribal mass organizations.

Then came a very pro-tribal and pro-people forest policy resolution in 1988, that recognized rights of tribal and other forest-dependent communities over forest resources. This legally non-justiciable document was followed by the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of) Forest Rights Act of 2006. The act as noted in the preamble is an attempt to correct the historic injustice done to adivasis and other forest dwelling communities. This is not conferring rights to tribal communities but restoring of their original rights taken away.

Shri Milind Thatte has surveyed 30 villages in the 3 states of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Maharashtra. The object was to find out the awareness and perceptions of forest-dwelling people about the Forest Rights Act and about forest along with some background information on the availability of forest produce and livelihood options. The survey utilized semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions and discussions with the members of the forest rights committees and forest officials. One must go through this document to understand the significance of findings of the survey. The villagers received the information of the Act through various resources. Villagers in one village in Madhya Pradesh received the information from an advertisement on radio and contacted a lawyer to know more about the Act and to assist its implementation. One common thing is the paucity of claims of community rights under the Act. For example, individual claims were filed in 11 villages in Maharashtra as against only one claim for community rights. As the author rightly points out most of the villagers in MP and Maharashtra were found to be simply unaware of community rights. Villagers on the whole are unaware of their intellectual property rights (IPR). The survey found out that only one village in Gujarat (out of 30 villages surveyed in the 3 states) has filed a claim for IPR on biodiversity. The survey also brings out the scarcity of firewood in the villages. Villagers now use dung cakes and agricultural waste as firewood. This is also true of fodder availability. While some villages have reduced the number of livestock, some have replaced grass by crop husks. Bamboo has become practically extinct thanks to the cutting by paper factories.

None of the 30 villages surveyed and one village in which the author works with a voluntary agency has irrigation for 50 percent or more households. There is not a single village where men do not migrate seeking work. The NREGA is touted as the most effective anti-poverty scheme by the government. However, it was found in the survey that not a single village has got work for 100 days as guaranteed.

Based on the findings of the survey, Shri Milind Thatte has made some recommendations to improve the implementation of the Act. The most important among them is to impart training to revenue officials in tribal affairs and particularly in the concept of community rights. The second is to prepare a sort of manual explaining the procedural guidelines. It is pointed out that the administration in general and revenue department in particular are in a rush to settle land claims as soon as possible. They find it easier to deal with claims of individual rights than community rights. This is clear from a recent news item in a daily from Pune1: It is announced that in Thane district, 15,707 adivasi households have been allotted titles under the Act. No details about individual claims and community claims have been furnished. It is also not clarified as to how many of these households belonged to scheduled tribes and other communities.

The study brings out many interesting facts about agricultural lands to be covered under the Act. This is a very timely study that will help the voluntary organizations and the government functionaries involved in the implementation of the Act.

The Act provides a rare opportunity to undo some of the ill effects of historic injustice done centuries ago. Such a historic opportunity must not be lost. This is a unique opportunity and also a challenge.

Read synopsis

Sharad Kulkarni
21 June 2010, Pune