Rajasthan: Tales of co-existence - kalpavriksh.orgkalpavriksh.org/images/CCA/Directory/Rajasthan_StateChapter.pdf · Rajasthan: Tales of co-existence Sandeep Khanwalkar 1. ... In

573

state

chap

ter - ra

jasth

an

Rajasthan: Tales of co-existence

Sandeep Khanwalkar

1. Background 1.1. Geographic profile

The State of Rajasthan was formed in 1950 and, at 342,239 sq km, is the largest state in India. It is bordered on the west and northwest by Pakistan, and by the states of Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat on the other sides. The topography is dominated by the Aravalli Mountains, running across the state, with the highest point at Guru Shikhar on Mount Abu. The Aravallis are rich in natural resources, including minerals. The southeastern part of the state is dominated by the uplands east of the Aravalli Range. The southern parts are heavily forested, but generally the state is thinly covered by vegetation, consisting of large areas of sandstone and of masses of rose-colored quartzite. The uplands are wide and stony, with a sandy central region. The valleys extend for many miles and the flattened hilltops form small plateaus.

Teak, dhok, acacia and bamboo grow on the lower slopes, and grasslands and pastures are found on the hilltops. The south-eastern pathar (Hadoti Plateau) covers the eastern part along the Chambal River. Over half the geographical area of the state is occupied by the Great Indian Desert (Thar Desert). Covering 209,000 sq km, it is bordered by the irrigated Indus plain to the west, the Aravalli Range to the southeast and the Rann of Kachchh to the south. Several saline lakes, locally known as dhands, are scattered throughout the region. The Aravallis form Rajasthan’s most important watershed. The major rivers in the state are the Chambal, Banas and Banganga.1

1.2. Ecological profile The state mainly has scrub jungle, and towards the west there are plants characteristic of arid

zones. Large trees are found mainly in the Aravallis and in eastern Rajasthan. The desert vegetation is mostly herbaceous or stunted scrub; on the hills acacias and euphorbias may be found. Khejari tree grows throughout the plains. Rohida is another economically useful tree of the state. Grasses form the main natural resource of the desert. Tigers are found in the Aravallis. Leopards, sloth bears, sambhar and chital occur in the hills, while nilgai, blackbuck and gazelles are numerous in the plains. Several migratory waterfowl are known to visit the state. The desert is the home of the vanishing Great Indian Bustard. The chinkara is the state animal, while the Great Indian Bustard is the state bird. The state has 23 wildlife sanctuaries and four national parks (Keoladeo, Ranthambhor, Sariska and the proposed Desert National Park).2 Of these, Ranthambhor and Sariska are also Tiger Reserves.

1.3. Socio-economic profileAs per the 2001 census, Rajasthan had a

population of 56.5 million, nearly 77 per cent of which was rural.3 Almost 89 per cent of the population is Hindu, about 8 per cent Muslim, and the rest are Jain, Christian, Sikh and Buddhist Deciduous forests of Kumbhalgarh Sanctuary

Photo: Ashish Kothari

574 Community Conserved Areas in India - a directory

minorities.4 Though small in terms of overall proportion of the state’s population, Rajasthan has one of India’s largest number of Jains, which may partly account for a strong vegetarian tendency amongst the population. Of the total population, about 17 per cent are scheduled castes, and almost 13 per cent scheduled tribes.

The population of the state includes numerous indigenous groups: minas, banjaras, bheels, gadia lohars, kalbelias, garasias, sahariyas and rebaris (the cattle breeders). Communities like rebari, gadia lohar, bhaat and banjara still follow nomadic lifestyles. Rebaris and gujjars migrate with their livestock, usually every monsoon, from the western parts of the state to the eastern parts. Although most of its area is arid or semi-arid, Rajasthan has a large livestock population5 and is the largest wool-producing state.6 It has a monopoly in camels and in draught animals of various breeds.7

2. A brief history of administrative control over land and resources

In the pre-independence era, Rajasthan was divided into several small and large princely states, each governed by separate laws. At that time forests were largely defined as natural and community forests. Natural forests were large expanses of forest owned by local rulers. Villagers were allowed to meet their basic needs from this category of forests. Commercial use was strictly prohibited. Community forests belonged to the village, but they were not allowed to destroy the forest. Commercial use of community forests was also not permitted. These forests were small in size and were only able to fulfil the villager’s small requirements like fuel wood, grass, fruits etc.

In the British districts of Ajmere (now Ajmer) and Merwara (now Udaipur, Rajsamand and Bhilwara) all ‘wastelands’ had been handed over to local inhabitants, with the government relinquishing all rights over these lands by the Settlement Act of 1850. The practical results of this policy, dictated though it was by the highest motives, were disastrous. The hills and other wastelands had become denuded, the wood was used up, what timber there was had been sold, and these lands were for the most part utterly barren. During the drought of 1867 and 1868 all grass on these hillsides dried up, and cattle perished or had to be driven away.8

Alwar was an independent state, having a protection treaty with the British, and had about 12 per cent of its territory under forest cover at the turn of the century. Till 1901, the state maintained roondhs (fodder reserves, grasslands in the valleys/ plains) and banis (areas where trees were reserved for state use). After the state’s needs were met, these areas were opened for adjacent villages to extract basic requirements such as wood for ploughs, etc. In addition there were lands under the management of the village bodies for resources such as shrubs, grasses, wood, etc. However, after a land settlement in 1872, the area under roondhs and banis was gradually extended by taking over more and more of the village commons on the pretext that the village cattle entered the state reserves. This created conflicts between the state and the villagers, which was further intensified after the state started maintaining a cavalry regiment, thus increasing its fodder requirements. As fodder scarcity increased, so did the boundary conflicts. In 1899 a Forest Boundary Commission was established to investigate these conflicts. As per the recommendations of the commission, the disputed land was returned to the villagers.

In 1901, the forest department was constituted, after which the informal access of the local people to government land was severely restricted and forests came under stricter and more rigid rules and regulations. In many villages the FD took over the village commons. The FD had a tendency to bring more and more area under its control and charge higher grazing fees. The forests were one of the highest sources of revenue for the state. After the settlements of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, lands for each village were clearly demarcated. It is said that felling of trees was less before 1934 and people could still extract dry wood and small timber for domestic needs. World War II resulted in enhanced timber felling.9 The demarcation and settlement of reserved forests was completed by 1940 but a majority of the cases relating to protected forests could not be disposed of till the princely states merged into Rajasthan. By this time most of the state forests has been felled. After the abolition of the jagirdari10 system in 1959 (under the Rajasthan Biswedari Abolition Act 1959), large areas came under the control of the government, but their control had to be taken over by the FD from the Revenue Department. Before the Act came into force, most jagirdars had sold their forests and the areas were clear-felled. The Rajasthan Forest Act was enacted in 1953, under which the forest areas were demarcated and settled and regulations made for their management. The forests which could not be classified, such as the jagirdari forests, were then called ‘unclassed forests’, and have since been classified as protected forests.11

Rajasthan 575 sta

te ch

ap

ter - ra

jasth

an

Management and control of the community pastures was transferred to panchayats,12 but ownership lay with government. As time passed and grazing pressures increased, the forests were degraded. Pastures were also allotted for mining operations, which affected them severely. As owners of pastureland, panchayats were unable to establish effective systems of management. The panchayats’ loose control motivated vested interests to begin encroaching the commons. Inadequate policy for removing encroachments saw vested interests taking ownership of these lands, as getting pattas (land ownership deeds) for encroached lands was easy. This became a common practice and most community pastures are today either severely encroached or in a degraded condition.

The Aravalli Sacred Grove Conservation Programme, a programme to restore the sacred groves of the Aravalli hills, was launched by the Udaipur Forest Division in 1992. The programme involves the protection of groves, planting of indigenous species, soil and water conservation, and participatory approaches to restoration. Moria Ka Khuna is a good example of conservation and development by FD. This sacred grove is located inside the forest in Udaipur. It has the best bamboo clumps in the Aravallis, in terms of clump dimensions and clump area. A bamboo plantation has been raised in the adjoining 50 ha of land to extend the area of the grove.13 In some areas, new sacred groves were developed in consultation with local communities, but in others local people were not informed of the new boundaries, bringing the ‘success’ of this programme into doubt. There has been no replication of programmes like Aravalli Sacred Groves Conservation in other districts of Rajasthan.

In parts of Western Rajasthan, the forest department has also developed some orans (sacred groves; see section 3.1.3) under the Desert Development Programme. However, the implementation of the programme was restricted to only a few pockets. In addition, some banis in Rajsamand district were developed by the forest department, but this also remained restricted to only one pocket. Such efforts are to be appreciated but are not sufficient to protect the tradition of conservation at community level. In most of these efforts the local institutions play little or no role in the conservation of these areas. In Rajasthan various programmes (e.g., Integrated Watershed Development Programme (IWDP), 1991; Drought Prone Area Development Programme (DPAP), 1974-75; and Desert Development Programme (DDP) 1977-78, funded by the central government) have been implemented to conserve and develop village commons. However, most of these programmes could not meet the objectives for which they were envisaged.

3. Elements of community conservationThe concept of togetherness and security for livelihood has helped develop community based

resource management systems. Dependence on natural resources for livelihood options leads to resource conservation efforts by communities at different levels.

The people of Rajasthan have always viewed themselves as part of a system, intricately linked to their fellow creatures, whether trees, birds, streams, or even rocks. Many of these natural elements are revered and protected as sacred totems. Entire patches of forests, or pools in river courses, or ponds may be considered sacred and accorded protection against exploitation. Such age-old traditions of nature conservation have played an important role in conserving India’s heritage of biodiversity.14

In arid areas with little forest cover, communities developed management systems based on individually owned resources like trees, beed (private lands protected by individuals for grass and fuel wood), community pastures, johad paithan,15 etc., while residents of the Aravalli and Vindhya ranges, who were more dependent on the forest for their livelihoods, developed systems based on the conservation of common resource pools. Brandis wrote in 1870 of territory belonging to the Thakur of Bednor, a feudatory to the Maharaja of Udaipur, of hills that were wooded, and of the state tradition of protecting beeds. Beeds continue to exist in several parts of Rajasthan on both private and common lands and are well maintained by the community: Sagrun village of Rajsamand district and some pastures of the Kailadevi Sanctuary of Karauli district are good examples.

The history of Rajasthan is incomplete without the mention of the bishnoi community, which has often been written about.

Community forests in Rajasthan have traditionally been used as pastures (gochar) for grazing animals. Commercial use of common resources from community forests was strictly prohibited, but


villagers were allowed to meet small commercial and household requirements like the collection of fuelwood and sale of gum, fruits and other non-timber forest produce (NTFP). In return for this privilege, villagers were expected to be responsible for forest protection. Self-imposed social regulations (e.g., open grazing is not permitted in the rainy season, watch-and-ward is conducted on a rotational basis and token amounts are levied on each household, based on the number of cattle owned, for harvesting of fodder) prevented their large-scale destruction. These community forests continue to abound in Rajasthan today and are referred to by various names (oran, bani, and dev van amongst others, discussed in detail in the sections that follow).

These traditional systems of resource conservation were developed and sustained only because of the community’s awareness of their importance and livelihood dependence on these resources. Regulatory systems were often woven around religious sentiment and belief.

3.1. Sacred elements in community conservationCECOEDECON, a voluntary organisation based at Chaksu, district Jaipur, recently commissioned

a study on sacred groves.16 This was a good effort but there is a need for such efforts on a larger scale. This study gives a brief idea about the status of sacred groves in Rajasthan.

Table 1: Status of sacred groves in Rajasthan17

District Number of groves

Barmer 253

Banswara 18

Chittorgarh 83

Dungarpur 25

Jaisalmer 27

Jalor 22

Jodhpur 21

Nagaur 31

Pali 57

Rajsamand 13

Sikar 2

Sirohi 92

Udaipur 46

3.1.1. Dev van or bani

No common understanding exists on the origin of mandir van or bani (temple grove) in Rajasthan. Hemaji, s/o Dhanaji (72 years old) of village Natudi in Ajmer district, believes that bani (and their associated water harvesting structures) were developed to meet the fodder and drinking water requirements of domestic and wild animals. It is also believed that during shifting cultivation, patches of forest were left undisturbed, in which all the species found in the area were protected; these patches ultimately became sacred groves. Because of their size and number, mandir van or banis have been studied comparatively more than other forms of community conserved areas in the state. Most mandir vans are rich in biodiversity: the van located in the forest patch of Dhad Devi near Kota is renowned for being the richest in terms of biodiversity per hectare in Rajasthan. In Hadoti (comprising the Kota, Bundi, Jhalawar and Tonk, Districts of Rajasthan), dev bani (God’s groves) were maintained in the belief that the local deity would protect the community’s talabs (waterbodies) and other water harvesting structures. The van was developed on the main bund of the talab to strengthen it.18

A large patch of land downstream of the talab was also demarcated as part of the dev van to compensate for any losses of tree growth to submergence. Only local tree species were planted in these vans.19

Rajasthan 577 sta

te ch

ap

ter - ra

jasth

an

Pandey and Singh studied the mandir vans (dev vans) or banis of Kota and Udaipur. They divided sacred groves of the southern Aravalli ranges and Vindhyachal ranges into three major categories. The first type of sacred groves were developed and managed by tribes, and are located in forests, near streams or on hills. The second type was devoted to Shankara. These are located in watershed areas. The third type consists of single trees like banyan (Ficus bengalensis), peepal (Ficus religiosa), and so on.

Institutional structures in management

Maintenance of the vans was assured by linking them to religious sentiments. On completion of talab construction, the pandit (local priest) would conduct a pran pratishtha (a religious ceremony) on an auspicious day. This ceremony established an annual celebration20 in homage to the deity residing in the van. Communities from neighbouring villages were invited to attend this function. The grand function, apart from celebrating the successful completion of the talab and the availability of a critical resource, was used to re-establish the area demarcated for the dev van in the presence of all the villagers. Regulations governing management and protection of the van were discussed and finalised in the presence of the mass gathering. These rules were never written but became part of an oral tradition that continues to be adhered to till today. Systems of management are site-specific and vary with communities inhabiting the area. Vans are either managed informally, by those associated with temples or by temple Trusts. Van management committees are mostly comprised of local people, but do include outsiders as well. The management committees are responsible for creating and enforcing rules and regulations concerning the protection and use of resources from the grove. However, even in instances where there are no formally defined management committees or formally deputed guards, sacred groves are still protected and in good condition because of unwritten rules, traditionally handed down from one generation to another.

The regulations governing the management of sacred groves throughout the state show several similarities. Enlisted below are the rules related to the dev van of Hadoti:

• Encroachments are not permitted or tolerated.

• The van can be only used for open grazing.

• No commercial use may be derived from resources extracted from the van.

• Wood extraction (dry) is permitted only for religious function in the van.

• Green felling is not permitted.

• Vans could not be used as open toilets.

• Kulharis (axes) are not permitted to be carried in the van.

• Hunting is not permitted.

The dev van developed in the lakheta21 of the Abheda Talab in Kota is a good example of wildlife protection and management.22 This dev van provides refuge for birds and other wildlife of the area. The main reason behind this is that the absence of any biotic pressure in the lakheta has helped in the natural growth of various trees and a variety of shrubs and herbs. Construction of a temple or open platform for the local deity sanctifies the vegetation in this dev van.

Constraints and opportunities

With little ongoing conservation effort, most of the banis or mandir vans are in a considerably degraded state. The state government too does not take much interest in protecting these groves, and no separate records of mandir vans are maintained by the Revenue Department.

Little or no effort is made either to maintain old growth, encourage regeneration or plant new saplings in degraded areas. Most vans are currently under various threats: submergence under talabs or tanks, clear-felling, mining and quarrying, encroachments, etc. For instance, part of Ubeshwarji Mandir Van was destroyed by the construction of an anicut across the stream flowing through the grove. The government constructed this anicut with little opposition from local people. The Sagasji Dev Van on the bund of the famous Jawahar Sagar, constructed by the King of Kota in 1790, is in need of urgent attention as the talab is now filled with the ash-waste of the National Thermal Power Corporation, Kota.

The vans are also under tremendous pressures to meet the fodder and fuelwood requirements of villages. Most of the youth and children of the neighbouring villagers do not know the history behind these dev vans, and therefore little emotional attachment among the youth exists. This has led to the erosion of traditional systems evolved for the management and maintenance of these sacred groves: encroachments or tree felling within the groves today thus face little opposition from local communities.


3.1.2. Kakad bani

Kakad is the name applied to areas located on the boundary of two villages. This common land between villages was developed as community forests known as kakad banis. In many places, kakad banis came to be linked with religion, as villagers began naming them after their local deity. The belief that damage or misuse of the bani would incur the wrath of the gods developed gradually within communities. Tree felling came to be considered a taboo. Resource extraction from the area was not permitted without consensus between both village communities. The banis were mainly used for controlled grazing and local fuelwood requirements, and also contributed to local economies from NTFP markets.

3.1.3. Orans

Orans are sacred patches of pastureland, devoted to a god or temple. The orans of Deshnok and Koramdesar temple are renowned in the state.

Historically, orans were developed by princely states to protect the common lands of villages. The objective behind this was to conserve natural resources. In the arid regions of Rajasthan, livelihoods have traditionally been based on animal husbandry. To ensure fodder availability, the king or jagirdar of that area allotted some portion of common lands to a temple. The involvement of the jagirdar in protection and management of the oran forced local inhabitants to conserve the area. Religious sanctity of the oran as well as the fear of the jagirdar ensured that orans remained protected. Orans are important components in the recharge of the aquifers in the desert, where every single drop of water is precious. In most orans, particularly in western Rajasthan, the dominant tree, khejari, is worshipped for its immense ecological value. Leave aside orans, people would not cut khejari trees even from their agricultural fields. The tree enriches soil nitrogen, and, during drought and famine, the bark of the tree is mixed with flour for consumption.23


Orans are a very common feature in the desert areas of Rajasthan. The traditional systems for their conservation and use are as follows:

• Felling of trees and commercial exploitation of orans are strictly prohibited. In some orans, lopping is permitted in times of fodder scarcity, but in others it is not permitted at all.

• Orans are considered common property resources and are used as grazing lands.

• People from any caste or class can bring their cattle for grazing, but they cannot damage or cut trees.

• People can also use NTFP resources of the oran.

• Earlier, if any person did cut a tree, that wood was confiscated and sent to the kathwada, a community wood godown.

• The guilty party was punished and had to provide grain at the local chabutara and was also fined a sum of money.

The orans also provided a space for adjacent villages to discuss socio-religious, economic and cultural issues and space to air and resolve personal grievances.


After Independence, the jagirdari system was abolished and the ownership of oran lands vested in the revenue department. The department could not understand the importance of orans in the sustenance of livelihood of local inhabitants, and were as a result unable to manage them in the traditional manner. Currently, the management of orans is under the panchayats. Panchayats, unfortunately, are highly political institutions with artificially constituted units of communities or villages with divergent agendas and social and economic identities, and have failed to manage these areas.24 Gradually, illicit felling in orans has become common. Traditional systems of social fencing have also broken down as the faith systems of younger generations changed. This has resulted in the degradation of most of the orans in the state. The legal status and total area of several orans have not been clearly defined. Unfortunately, these lands have not even been declared as forest lands, hence effective legislation cannot be enforced to deter offenders.25

There are, however, several cases where people of the area have shown keen interest in protecting the village oran. They have protested encroachments by outsiders as well as members of their own community without the fear of severing relations with these people. They have filed several cases in court against those who threatened the oran.

Rajasthan 579 sta

te ch

ap

ter - ra

jasth

an

For example, in village Para of Barmer district, villagers under the leadership of Sanwal Singh and Arjun Ram Darji filed a case with the help of the local patwari (revenue official) against Sagat Singh and Lakh Singh of same village because they encroached the oran land for agriculture and other purposes. In village Gehun of Barmer district, villagers, under the leadership of Kamal Singh Rajput, Gemaram Nai, Deeparam Raika and others, filed a case against the forest department to protect the land from the forest department. This case was filed in the Jodhpur High Court and villagers won the case only because of their unity and awareness.

3.1.4. Kesar chhanta

In southern Rajasthan people sprinkle saffron on the boundary of the forest area to indicate that the area would henceforth be protected and felling of trees would no longer be permitted. This ritual of sprinkling saffron has helped protect several areas of forests in Southern Aravallis by placing voluntary restrictions on green felling. In the Udaipur South Forest Division alone, about 12,000 ha of forests are protected by people through kesar chhanta.26


At a village meeting, the patch of forest to be protected is declared. Contributions are sought to meet the basic costs of completing the process. Saffron (kesar) or rice is collected from an appointed temple, as a symbol of the local deity (most often Rishabhdev-Keshariyaji), and people then move around the forest patch beating drums to communicate the message that kesar is being sprinkled and that the area is now under community protection.

Selection of forest patches depends on local resource requirements based on the following criteria:

• Vegetative cover

• Degree of degradation

• Potential for regeneration

• Requirements of the dependent community

• Common arrangements on the area covered in kesar chhanta

• Availability of other areas to fulfill resource requirements after reducing access to this area

Villagers are permitted to water their cattle if there is any reservoir in the forest patch. Vaids (traditional medical practitioners) are permitted to extract local medicines. People in general can only extract NTFP in times of scarcity. Fodder extraction is permitted but grazing is not.


The past few centuries saw a dramatic change in the sensitivity of the local villagers towards conservation of the village commons and particularly the forest lands. At present the rural youth, who are mainly responsible for taking forward the traditions, have either less interest in community management practices or have no faith in them. The basic reason is probably because of getting lesser returns. However, there are still examples of community-managed pasturelands which can be seen in the southern part of Rajasthan.

The system of kesar chhanta is still alive in this region and can again be reactivated in many more areas to bring awareness among the younger generation so that they realize the importance of community management and that is in the better interest of the local community that the age-old tradition is carried forward. Apart from this the government is also providing the opportunities to the villagers through formation of local village institutions in programmes like Joint Forest Management, Watershed Development, and IWDP. If these programmes are implemented in a systematic way, then there are bright chances of communities taking over the management of the pasturelands.

3.1.5. Radi

Close to village settlements, amidst cultivable areas, are remarkable woodlands, known as radis, which are found in Bundi, Kota, Baran and Jhalawar districts of Rajasthan. Radis are most frequent in Kota. Adjoining these radis are farmlands, sharply demarcated from the surrounding country. Consisting mainly of babul (Acacia nilotica) trees, they are only found within the Vindhya hills of Hadoti. They were earlier mostly timber-supply forests being maintained by patels and jagirdars on behalf of the village, somewhat as private property.27 Radi now considered is a common property


of one or two villages.

A.P.F Hamilton,28 the then Inspector General of Forests, wrote in an inspection note in 1946 after visiting the forests of Kota State:

‘There already exists a type of minor forest called radi: they are small forests, generally babul, managed by the State entirely for the use of the villagers, to whom the trees are sold at low rates. This is the sort of thing that is required all over India in rural districts where forests are scarce or absent. I would suggest that this excellent custom be extended in the State; and particularly in those areas, which have become denuded of forest. Babul is the best tree but it will not grow everywhere and Prosopis juliflora should be sown wherever conditions are unfavorable for it. These little forests should not be expensive to establish and protection might be given through a system of collective responsibility on the part ofthe villagers or through local panchayat. I think they will pay for themselves in the end.’

The Government of Rajasthan, by various notifications between 1960 and 1970, legally transferred small radis to panchayats and entered them as charagah (pasture) lands, and large radis were declared as reserved forests.

Pandey records the largest radi—Khandgaon Ki Radi, near the Pisahedi, Rajpura, Alyahedi, Deoli and Khandgaon villages—at 194 ha (1.94 sq km).

Use of radi

Resource use in the radis can be described in several ways:29

• Roads and village paths may pass through it. Bharbardaris (head-loaders) were given right of passage and fuelwood collection.

• Water points: Some radis also have talai, ponds or small depressions where livestock could drink water. These ponds are in close proximity, to places of worship, though the place of worship may not always be situated inside the radi. For example, Khandgaon Ki Radi has Sunari Talai and Bheruji Ki Talai.

• Places of worship: Some radis have devasthans (sacred places) where villagers offer prayers and worship during festivals. Khandgaon Ki Radi has several sacred places, such as Ajraji, Sida Mataji and Bheruji.

• Funeral places: Radis may also be the sites for funerals, as is the case with Khandgaon ki Radi.

• Grazing: Grazing of village cattle is permitted free of cost.

• Fuelwood: Collection of dead and fallen wood is permitted free of cost.


The main constraints in the conservation and development of radi are encroachment by the people, illegal mining, illegal tree felling, etc. Efforts are being made by the government to promote this traditional conservation practice, but unfortunately only in very few cases. The major setback to this traditional method was declaration of radis as reserved forests rather than involving villagers in protection and management of radi. In several cases where the area under plantation is more, these patches of plantations are being termed as forest lands, but in cases where the area is small it is not falling under the forest land category. Apparently both – the government and the local villagers -- neglect the maintenance and protection of these small patches. No proper efforts have been made to promote radi to widely establish it in the Hadoti region. There are several examples available within the state when government declared the radi as reserved forest and within few years it got degraded.

Now the question is: how to promote this age-old tradition to meet the fuel–fodder requirement of the villagers? Attempts should be made to involve the villagers where such radis are still present and can be used to meet out the fuel–fodder requirements through the Joint Forest Management Programme.

3.2. Self-initiated community efforts at natural resource management3.2.1. Efforts at Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary30

Apart from the traditional systems of conservation and natural resource management mentioned above, there are numerous examples where

Rajasthan 581 sta

te ch

ap

ter - ra

jasth

an

the communities have taken up conservation efforts in recent times. These efforts are often a consequence of serious resource scarcity. Such community efforts are typically exemplified by the efforts of Baragaon ki Panchayat (council of twelve villages) in Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary, within the buffer zone of Ranthamboree National Park in Sawai Madhopur district. The vegetation of the area is dry deciduous, dominated by dhok. Though not much wildlife can be seen here today, this area was once as famous for wild animals as is the neighboring Ranthamboree. It is also a part of the tiger reserve, forming part of its buffer zone. In the decades preceding 1980s, these forests were under several external pressures, such as hunting activities of the imperial rulers (before Independence) and more recently of the bargi community; government forestry operations; illegal felling; mining; and extensive grazing by the migratory rabari community. The sanctuary is inhabited by predominantly pastoral gujjar and meena communities. Hit by the resource scarcity resulting from these activities, the villages in the area decided to organise themselves and oppose the excessive use of resources by outsiders like the Rabaris, as well as to regulate their own use of the resources.

Institutional arrangements in management

In 1990, 12 villages (traditionally having an apex body for conflict resolution) decided to form the Baragaon ki Panchayat, primarily to take stock of the rabari problem. This body gradually started taking the responsibility for protecting the forest. The elders of the individual villages formed the kulhadi band panchayat (no-axe council). This council in each village ensured that no one went to the forest with an axe to fell green trees. Only dry and dead wood was allowed to be collected for fuel. The kulhadi band panchayat resolves all forest-related offences, and when they cannot be resolved at this level the matter is taken up to Baragaon ki Panchayat. As a result of this initiative, forest use is highly regulated and Rabaris are not allowed to enter in certain areas.

In more recent years, the community initiatives have run into trouble. This is partly due to the GEF-funded ecodevelopment project carried out by the forest department, under which Ecodevelopment Committees were set up in many villages. These new institutions did not necessarily build on the villagers’ own institutions such as the Baragaon ki Panchayat, but rather tended to undermine them. (See Case Studies)

3.3. Community efforts supported or initiated with the help of NGOsSeveral NGOs have contributed significantly to conservation of natural resources in the state.

Some of these NGOs and their efforts are mentioned below.

3.3.1. The Tarun Bharat Sangh (TBS)

The TBS was founded some 16 years ago, with the objective of accelerating rural development through restoration of ecology. TBS is based in Bhikampura Kishori in Alwar district, and is known for its efforts in reviving the traditional rainwater harvesting structures. TBS claims to have constructed more than 4500 check dams in various villages in Rajasthan. The NGO propagates by word of mouth the art of making earthen dams. About 1200 villages in this drought prone area are believed to have benefited from the efforts of the NGO. The process of construction of the water harvesting structures (locally called johads) is usually accompanied by regeneration and protection of the forest making up the catchment of the johads, and micro-credit programmes for the local women.

The Arvari river is a small but important river in Alwar district feeding Sainthan Sagar lake. For the villages settled along the river, the Arvari is a lifeline. This area is a part of the Aravalli range that extends from Rajasthan to Delhi. The region is dry, receiving less than 600 mm of rainfall annually. Over the last few decades severe droughts have characterised many of the villages in this district.

There are 70 villages in the Arvari catchment. Local livelihoods are a combination of intensive rainfed cultivation and animal husbandry. This area had a tradition of trapping water during the short rainy season in a series of small johads. Systems were in place to ensure that these johads were regularly maintained and their catchments were protected to avoid siltation. In the post-independence era, over-dependence on the state for irrigation caused neglect of johads, while excessive tree felling for various reasons by the state and local people caused complete degradation of their catchments. As a result many rivers like the Arvari ran dry, forcing people to move out in search of employment and reducing the soil productivity to the minimum. From the time that TBS started (towards the end of 1980s), about 200 water-harvesting structures have been built in the catchment of the Arvari by local villagers with help from TBS. These structures have replenished ground water and increased the water table, enabling the Arvari to flow perennially again.


The twin villages of Bhaonta-Kolyala have a combined population of about 600, covering an area of 1200 ha. They have played a prominent role in this initiative of combining water harvesting, forest conservation and other rural development work. In order to carry out these activities the village has formed a gram sabha (village assembly), although this institution has no legal or state recognition. The village has constructed about 17 johads over a period of a decade. These structures have been built with technical help and 75 per cent of the cost covered by TBS. The village contributed 25 per cent of the cost as labour or in kind. The village is protecting the catchment forests of these johads by regulating grazing, fuel wood collection and reducing the number of livestock in the village. On the other hand, presence of perennial water has increased agricultural productivity and improved the groundwater situation, thus reducing the need for out-migration. (see case study for details). After a decade of successful protection, based on a suggestion from TBS, the villagers decided to call their forest Bhairon Dev Lok Van Abhyaranya (Bhairon Dev People’s Sanctuary) in October 1998.31

Arvari sansad

In 1998, at the initiative of TBS the villagers of 34 villages (of the total 72 situated in the Arvari basin) met and decided to constitute an Arvari sansad or Arvari parliament. The sansad includes two members from each village, selected by the local village institutions. The sansad meets every six months to take decisions about the land, water and forests.

A 15-member co-ordinating committee was formed, headed by Kanhaiya Lal Gujjar from Bhaonta and Chaju Ram of Samara village. This co-ordinating committee is in the process of preparing a set of guidelines for resource utilisation in the catchment based on suggestions arising out of discussions with the local villagers. The committee is also in the process of identifying government officials interested in decentralised management, in order to start consultations with them. An action plan has also been made, under the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan process.32

Opportunities and constraints

Though this initiative has resulted in improved status of natural resources and a consequent improvement in the social status of the local villagers, there are still many issues which need serious consideration. The boundaries used by the conserving villages such as Bhaonta are traditional boundaries, not necessarily recognised by neighbouring villagers who do not agree with the conservation approach of these villages. Since these villages do no have any legal authority to stop outsiders, this gives rise to conflicts among these villages. Of late (in the early years of the new millennium), the surrounding villages too have begun to appreciate the need to conserve the forests.

There are also often problems of intra-village inequities, with complaints from the lower castes and classes of discrimination or not being included in the decision-making process. Non-participation of women in decision-making and implementation is one serious concern in Rajasthan.

3.3.2. Seva Mandir33

Seva Mandir was established in 1966 by Mohan Singh Mehta. Seva Mandir works in the economically and socially deprived tribal belt of Udaipur district, where there is a heavy dependence of people upon natural resources. Over the years they have spread their work to about 535 villages in Udaipur District. Their main activities are in the field of natural resource development, education, health, women and child development, and institution building. Seva Mandir has been involved in a number of villages, and regeneration and conservation of natural resources has been taken up by the villagers. In addition, it has been involved with a number of biodiversity studies in the Aravalli region, including documenting people’s knowledge and perception of biodiversity. They have also helped develop a strategy for conserving biodiversity in the Mahad cluster in Phulwari Ki Nal wildlife sanctuary in Kotra block of Udaipur District.

In village Badlipada, the Udaipur based NGO Seva Mandir started its activities through adult education programme in the 80s. The organization contributed to the process of institution building, to a large extent through its continuous involvement. A major turn in village events came in 1995 when a village education committee was set up. As the committee became an accepted institution, all aspects and issues related to health, education, agriculture, pastures, forests and other social issues started getting discussed in the committee meeting. After the drought of 1987 villagers decided to close their charnot (pastureland). But Raju and Behra of Badlipada village and Lakhama of Richawar village encroached the pastureland. Villagers started protesting against the encroachment. A committee meeting was called to discuss the matter, where these three encroachers were also called to sort out the matter but they did not turn up. In 1996 the committee

Rajasthan 583 sta

te ch

ap

ter - ra

jasth

an

members went to the sub-divisional officer of Jhadol to appeal for action against the encroachers and they succeeded in declaring entire 75 bighas of land as village pastureland. Apart from this, in order to put additional pressure on the encroachers, the villagers also decided to socially boycott them. But the efforts were in vain and the encroachers continued to take crops on the pastureland. In February 2001 villagers decided to destroy the crop. And one fine day they also broke the house of the encroacher and freed their pastureland from the encroachers. After this villagers enclosed the charnot in its entirety and started plantation and other pasture development activities with the help of Seva Mandir in April 2001. Now the villagers have come out with a very good management system of this pastureland. They have appointed two watchmen who are paid Rs 300 per month. In October 2002 the villagers did the kesar chhidakav (sprinkling of saffron) in the charnot. After the enclosure of the charnot, villagers have harvested the grass twice. One member from each household is allowed to harvest the grass. They also fixed a price per sickle. In the first year they were able to harvest 8,000 bundles of grass (each 1.5 kg in weight). In order to realize these benefits, it took sustained efforts of seven years from the people of Badlipada to free their charnot of encroachment.34

3.4. Community action initiated by the government3.4.1. Joint Forest Management

The Joint Forest Management movement is now more than a decade old in the state and seems to have made considerable progress. There is a lot of development since 1991, when the JFM directive was issued in Rajasthan. Initially, there were separate resolutions for working in non-forest lands, such as revenue wasteland and forest land. The directives issued on 15th May 1999 put both types of land under the same category. There are a total of 3667 village forest protection and management committees (VFPMC) in the state that cover an area of 376765.88 hectares of forest land. Total forest area of Rajasthan is 3.19 million ha. Dense forest is 0.36 million ha., open forest 0.95 million ha. and barren forest 2.88 million ha35, out of which around 11.81 per cent area is covered under JFM, according to the forest department.

But the major question is whether these VFPMCs are functioning as per the JFM guidelines. The answer is in the negative. Because it is still in its initial phase, the villagers are not convinced whether they will get benefits from the forest or whether they will be sidelined at the time of benefit-sharing. In most of the cases villagers are getting grass, tendu leaves, fuelwood and other NTFPs in the southern and dang areas of Rajasthan. None of the villages is in the position to share the timber from the forest as a final sharing. It is because most of the forest lands are yet to mature and in the old forests villagers are not in the position to ask the FD for their share, because the GR says that the VFPMC would only share in the final felling if they have contributed a major share in the development of the forest. The FD claims that old forests are their property and that villagers have not contributed in the development of these forests. Therefore the question is still valid and the FD is not in a position to answer the question. They have also got a big project sanctioned from the Japanese government to develop the degraded forest area of the Aravalli hill range. It is still not clear whether the communities would be involved in execution of this project.


For effective implementation of JFM, a VFPMC is to be formed in the respective villages. Every family living in the village would be a member of the general body of the VFPMC. There will be a women’s sub-committee to promote active women’s participation in the VFPMCs’ activities. The VFPMC will be formed in the presence of 40 per cent members of general body. 11 members would be elected to the executive body. This body then selects a president, vice president and treasurer. A secretary would be appointed from the FD for two years. After successful completion of two years villagers can appoint their own secretary. The term of this executive body would be two years, after which a new body would be elected. Terms of reference between the FD and VFPMC would be signed. As per the JFM guidelines, the roles and responsibilities of various office bearers are as follows:

• The president provides overall leadership and direction.

• The vice-president assists the president and plays an advisory role.

• The secretary, who is the local forester in most of the cases, keeps all records (including money transactions and minutes of meetings) and maintains the link between the committee and FD.


• The treasurer would be responsible for all financial transactions.

In JFM, the institutional structure is well defined, but in practice the control is with the forest department and villagers do not have any say in decisions. Most of the decisions are taken by the forest department and the VFPMC has to follow. This is mainly because of low awareness level at the community and/or VFPMC level.

Opportunities and constraints

There are various issues related to JFM in Rajasthan. There are constraints in promoting and establishing JFM in Rajasthan but there are opportunities as well. Some of the constraints are:

• Less effort has been taken to allow greater space and opportunities to the local community for proper management of forests.

• The local forester is so overloaded with work that there is very little scope for him to acquire greater understanding of JFM-related opportunities and management processes.

• In most of the villages the forest plays a major role in the livelihood of people, but there have been no serious efforts within the state to look at JFM beyond plantation protection, except for a few examples like Varai Devi VFPMC in Chittorgarh district of Rajasthan.

• Raising awareness and broad understanding about JFM-related issues is essential to fully release the benefits of people-friendly approaches to forest management. Voluntary organisations can play a crucial role in this regard.

• Capacity building of VFPMC members and FD staff is the immediate intervention required for successful JFM implementation.

In Rajasthan there are good opportunities to promote JFM. In most of the villages, residents understand the importance of forests in their livelihood, and they are coming forward to protect and develop their forest. For this to succeed, awareness-building among the villagers about JFM is a must.

Box l

Joint Forest Protection and Management in Nayakhera village36

Nayakhera is a small village located at a distance of about l5 km from Udaipur city. The local forest ranger took the initiative and persuaded the villagers to constitute a VFPMC. The village elders also favoured the idea of protecting their own forests to meet their basic needs of fodder and fuelwood. The VFPMC was registered in June 1995 and has since raised plantations over 315 ha of degraded forest land. The villagers take pride in showing this dense patch of forest to the visitors now. In addition to this the VFPMC is also protecting 120 ha of natural forests adjoining the village. The grass thus produced has a ready market in the surrounding areas and earns substantial revenue for the villagers. An anicut has been constructed with help from the forest department, which has not only recharged the ground water but is also now an important source of water for irrigation. Nayakhera village has won the state prize for forest protection.

4. Emerging issues and the way aheadMost community resource-use areas are currently under varying degrees of threat. There are

no favourable government policies for protection and promotion of such practices, nor does the government have any systematic records of such initiatives. No special legal status is accorded to these areas and no action is taken on complaints of encroachment. Market forces have severely affected the very basis on which the ethos of community conservation is based, and panchayats are unable to protect the common property resources (CPRs) because of personal agendas and limited understandings of the impact of commons on livelihoods. Internal politics and conflicts, lack of awareness, little or no financial support, and encroachments by migrants are other reasons that have led to the degradation of these resource-use areas. Though these areas once played a vital role in meeting fodder requirements in times of scarcity, the degradation of resources over time has eroded traditional conservation management systems.

The central government has launched a programme called Maru Gochar Yojana with an objective of developing orans, pasturelands and gochar land in villages. This programme is for a short period of three years and would be implemented in ten desert districts of Rajasthan. Forest department has been given the responsibility to prepare the project proposal. This project would be implemented

Rajasthan 585 sta

te ch

ap

ter - ra

jasth

an

through the gram panchayats. The forest department would play the role of a technical support agency to the panchayats. The total cost of this project is Rs 10 crores. This is not sufficient to conserve and develop such a large area of degraded pastures.

4.1. Future strategy for conservation and development of CCAsSome of the strategies that could lead to the development of the CCAs are as follows:

• Regeneration and/or plantation programmes, as appropriate, should be undertaken on a large scale in CCAs.

• Seminars at school as well as college level to highlight the importance of CCA in maintaining livelihoods should be organized on a regular basis.

• The government should conduct detailed surveys to prepare a directory of CCAs.

• A policy to promote CCAs must be formulated.

• Documentation of traditional practices should be done and shared.

• Programmes like the Aravalli Sacred Groves Conservation Programme should be replicated on a much larger scale.

• Some portion of panchayat funds should be spent on conserving CCAs.

• Conservation of sacred groves should be a priority in developmental programmes like watershed development programmes.

Sandeep Khanwalkar is associated with ARAVALLI, Rajasthan; email:[email protected]

Endnotes1 Rajasthan Institute for Public Administration, Rajasthan State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, 2002. Prepared for National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan - India. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Contained in CD with Securing India’s Future: Technical Report of the NBSAP – India (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).

2 Rajasthan Institute for Public Administration, Rajasthan State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. (As above)

3 http://www.censusindia.net/t_00_003.html

4 http://www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Religiondata_2001.xls

5 Total livestock population is 54,348,901. Source: Livestock Census, 1997, Board of Revenue for Rajasthan.

6 Total wool production (2000-01): 196 lakh kg.

7 Rajasthan Institute for Public Administration, Rajasthan State Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. (As above)

8 Brandis D. Indian Forestry. Oriental University Institute. 1897.

9 S. Shresth and S. Devidas Forest Revival and Water Harvesting. Community Based Conservation at Bhaonta-Kolyala, Rajasthan. (London and Pune International Institute of Environment and Development and Kalpavriksh, 2001).

10 Jagirdari shall mean any person (holding jagir or any interest therein in any part of the state) and recognized as a jagirdar under any existing jagir law and shall include a grantee of jagir land from a jagirdar.

11 Shresth and Devidas, Forest Revival. (As above).

12 As per the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953

13 Shresth and Devidas, Forest Revival. (As above).

14 Madhav Gadgil and Ramachandra Guha, Equity and Ecology: The Use and Abuse of nature in Contemporary India (New Delhi, Penguin Books, 1995).

15 Johad is a community pond and paithan is its catchment area.

16 CECOEDECON. Undated. Orans: Marubhumi Me Hariyali Ki Chadar (Shil ke Dungri, Chaksu, CECOEDECON).

17 (As above).

18 For any talab, the bund is the main part and water pressure is comparatively greater on the bund than any other part. As most of this region is plain, the length of a bund has to be longer to distribute the water pressure evenly. It therefore makes a lot of sense to plant trees along the bunds.

19 D.N. Pandey, Sajha Van Prabandhan (Udaipur, Himanshu Publications, 1998).

20 Every villager contributes towards meeting the costs of this function. Villagers from the neighbouring villages were


also invited to attend this function. After completion of pooja (prayer), villagers sing traditional songs and bhajans (hymns) in praise of God. On this day villagers have their food there. Every villager has to contribute some amount as per her/his capacity to celebrate this function. It has become a tradition to celebrate this day every year.

21 An island constructed during talab construction.

22 Pandey, Sajha Van Prabandhan. (As above).

23 See www.wwfindia.org.

24 D.N. Pandey, 1999. ‘Sacred Forestry: The Case of Rajasthan, India’, Sustainable Development International, 1-6 (1999), available at: http://www.p2pays.org/ref/40/39748.pdf.

25 Pandey, Sajha Van Prabandhan. (As above).

26 Pandey, ‘Sacred Forestry’. (As above).

27 (As above).

28 Quoted in Pandey, ‘Sacred Forestry’. (As above).

29 (As above).

30 Priya Das, ‘Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary: Prospects of Joint Management’ in Ashish Kothari,Farhad Vania, Priya Das, K. Christopher and Suniti Jha (eds), Building Bridges: Towards Joint Management of Protected Areas in India (New Delhi, Indian Institute of Public Administration, 1997).

31 Ashish Kothari, Neema Pathak and Farhad Vania, Where Communities Care: Community Based Wildlife and Ecosystem Management in South Asia (Pune, International Institute of Environment and Development and Kalpavriksh, 2000).

32 Tarun Bharat Sangh. 2003. Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Arvari Catchment. A Sub -State Site in Rajasthan. Prepared for National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan – India. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Contained in CD with Securing India’s Future: Technical Report of the NBSAP – India (Pune, Kalpavriksh, 2005).

33 Seva Mandir, Documentation of people’s knowledge and perception about biodiversity and conservation across related ecosystems and agro-ecology zones in Rajasthan, Udaipur (Udaipur, Seva Mandir, 1997).

34 Seva Mandir. Land community & Governance: An exploration of Seva Mandir’s work with Rural Communities and Governance Mechanisms on Land in Udaipur, Rajasthan (Udaipur, Sewa Mandir).

35 Government of India, Forest Survey of India 2003, available at: http://www.fsiorg.net/fsi2003/states/index.asp?state_code=23&state_name=Rajasthan)

36 Rajasthan Institute for Public Administration 2005. (As above).

Documents

Rajasthan: Tales of co-existence - kalpavriksh.orgkalpavriksh.org/images/CCA/Directory/Rajasthan_StateChapter.pdf · Rajasthan: Tales of co-existence Sandeep Khanwalkar 1. ... In