By Raka Matchisal A. Sangma
Am I bi-polar, to have alternating episodes of intense joy and depressive lows? It fits the definition, but this “mixed feeling”was induced by the proposal that came out in February last year, to nominate Garo Hills Conservation Area (GHCA) in Meghalaya, as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in the “Mixed-Category.” The news was an ear-candy for naturalists, environmentalists, conservationists, and other bio-files. It also triggered a sense of pride in the Garo tribe and indeed it should. The Garos must be proud of their natural and cultural heritage. If it does get the tag of a UNESCO World Heritage Site, then it will be the second site under the mixed category, the only one in the country at present being Khangchendzonga National Park in Sikkim. Whoever thought that there would be a 337.48Km2 of area in Garo Hills that would one day make it to the tentative list of the nomination process to be considered for inclusion in UNESCO’s World Heritage List? Of course, many have admired the richness and unique biodiversity of Garo Hills, but did you ever think that the place would have such, “Outstanding Universal Values” (OUVs) which are so exceptional as to transcend national boundaries? Notwithstanding the OUVs, there is always a ‘but’ and hence the mixed feelings.
Looting and Plundering of Natural Heritage
Reality is cruel and ignorance is bliss. Is the GHCA getting nominated to UNESCO’s list of World Heritage Site or to the list of World Heritage Sites in Danger – a step away from getting delisted? With the current trend in illegal coal mining in and around the proposed site and some within it, despite the supposed “NGT Ban” (Sometimes people get confused with the Green in National Green Tribunal, whether it is the colour symbolising nature or the colour of the dollar); poaching inside the protected areas (It is always an open season.); illegal felling of timber and the inter-state smuggling business (the irony of Protected Areas); threats from invasive alien species; deforestation, habitat destruction and fragmentation, all with the connivance, consent, ignorance or under the noses of the concerned departments, to be delisted after getting listed could be the fate of GHCA.
Gieve Patel’s epic poem, “On Killing A Tree,” aptly describes how to completely kill a tree. In it, the Mumbai based poet ironically narrates man’s onslaught of nature, which is symbolised in the poem by a tree. The poet tells us that it is not easy to kill a tree, that “the mere act of hacking and chopping is not sufficient to kill a tree.” In a nutshell, the poet is sympathising with nature against the cruelty of man. That although nature is resilient against accidents and minor blows, a continuous and deliberate act of man, driven by the spirit of greed and selfishness can and will totally annihilate nature. How then will the International Union of Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), which is the Advisory Body mandated by the World Heritage Convention to evaluate the natural aspects of the nominated site, approve of its induction? How can IUCN evaluate, when there is nothing left to evaluate?
Let me romanticise poaching so that its horror stays in your mind. Let this send a sense of urgency to immediately curb the menace of poaching. This is my experience, during one of my hiking expeditions to the Nokrek National Park.
An ominous crack heralding death and destruction pierced through the thick foliage and broke the slumbering music of nightfall. Petrified as I was, I gaped at my three companions, demanding answers from their expressions lit by the dim sliver of twilight filtering through the canopy. Before I could utter a word, frantic calls of a Barking deer resonated through the woods, preventing me from making any conjecture and true to my anticipation, another gunshot cracked, sending a chill down my spine. With one last frail note, the deer was hushed, and along with it, the forest which was seconds ago teeming with courtship songs of insects and frogs. All fell into silence. The poor animal was probably dead before the second gunshot reached our ears.
Under such circumstances, can we still hope that GHCA will fare well in IUCN’s evaluation? Not to mention the make-shift camps of the poachers that we stumbled across inside the core area of the national park! In the camp’s premises, there was a skin (probably of a palm civet) impaled on a stick, and partly scorched feathers of birds, scattered where they had conjured their fire. Such audacity of the poachers clearly sends a message that there is no law in the jungle. It was a complete mockery of the authorities who have been tasked to protect the wild dwellers of the so called protected areas. Also another infuriating encounter in the periphery of the national park, were the number of illegally constructed sawing platforms and the scores of aged trees felled for timber. Given the foregoing discussion, the last four categories under which the OUVs will be evaluated by IUCN appears to be at a rather weak stance.
Disappearing Cultural Heritage – The elephant in the room.
“I’m clothed, yet I still feel naked.” This was what one elderly lady from the village of Kemragrein West Garo Hills had to say.She felt naked in the sense that she missed wearing the ornaments like earrings, bangles, necklaces and other personal adornments that she used to wear before converting to Christianity. It is the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. It is not a mere identity crisis. Our culture and our indigenous traditional knowledge (ITK), that has since time immemorial guided our way of life, is disappearing in the fast pace of life and disregarded as folklore. The dominant Christian community has stigmatised the way of life of the Songsareks, which has a history of living intimately with nature. The word Songsarek now has a negative connotation attached to it. The word when used in many contexts is derogatory and often expresses the discontinued way of life in the forgotten past.
The threat to the cultural heritage of the Garos is not one external but is from within. Nature is resilient. It can bounce back through the process of succession. But the indigenous traditional knowledge once lost will be a folklore and a relic of the past.So how can we nominate something that is non-existent? How can we nominate the traditional values that we ourselves do not value? The International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), the two Advisory Bodies which respectively provides evaluation of the cultural criteria and provide expert advice on the conservation of the cultural sites, will not have much substance to work on.
Way Forward
Not only did modernisation in its myriad ways caused the extinction of many floral and fauna species, but its effects have also impacted the survival of indigenous knowledge and practices. The Garos already have a history of losing their own script as relayed in the book “The Folk-Tales of the Garos,” authored by Dewan Sing Rongmuthu, in the first content of the book, titled, “The A’chik Script.” Let us all be wary of our diminishing traditional values and preserve what is significant. Let us not leave behind another history of loss. Let us pass on our rich natural and cultural heritage to the next generation.
On the bright side and enough of the vice, I firmly believe that GHCA will soon be in the list of UNESCO’s World Heritage Sites. The future is not that bleak, provided our existing and surviving natural and cultural heritages are insulated from abrupt and detrimental change to the environmental conditions, intrusion of religion, mainstream developmental activities, policies that undermine the traditional authorities and regenerative capacity of the environment.
(The writer is an alumnus of Jamsetji Tata School of Disaster Studies, TISS, Mumbai and an environmental conservation enthusiast who is deeply worried over the present reality of socio-environmental mess in which Meghalaya is in)