By H H Mohrmen
The cutting down of trees at the Upper Shillong area to allow for expansion of the road from Shillong to Dawki has compelled many to raise their voices against this act. Citizens who are concerned about the arbitrary felling of these trees reached through the only means of communication available in their hands to raise their voices. All of a sudden a virtual battle broke out between those who are against the cutting of trees and those who wish that the construction of the road is not hampered.
It is true that this portion of the road has become a bottleneck for the flow of traffic to and from the Upper Shillong area. The need for the expansion of the road is a fair argument, but the question that the other side is asking is at what cost. But have we not heard of this before? And in the conflict between development and conservation, it is always nature which is being sacrificed at the altar of development. The argument between developments versus conservation is the dilemma that the society has to face every now and then. People caught in the dilemma are made to choose between development and conservation. As if there the no alternative or there is no middle ground where development and conservation go hand in hand.
People are made to understand that because population has increased hence there is a need for bigger roads, bigger bridges and bigger buildings to accommodate human needs. People want bigger roads because we buy bigger cars, bigger trucks not bigger buses though. The world over public transport is being seen as the only way to help cut emission which will in turn help reduce global warming. People are encouraged to use public transport in the advanced countries but in Meghalaya the competition is to buy bigger and more expensive cars, despite the terrain. Heads of states of many western countries use public transport to shuttle to and from their offices but in our State, politicians are in the competition to buy the most expensive SUVs or high-end luxury cars. If one buys a Jeep Rubicon then the other must buy a Mercedes Benz and no one even dares to ask where the money comes from.
Nature has become an easy scapegoat; it is being sacrifice for livelihoods in the mining areas and it is being sacrifice for economic development, for bigger roads and mansions. Those who raised their voices against the cutting of trees were indirectly compelled to remain silent by being asked to make up their minds whether they want roads or trees. They were made to feel guilty for raising the issue as if they are the main culprits in the entire predicament. Why this selective concern against the cutting of trees in the Upper Shillong area only? They were instead blamed for making a mountain out of a molehill and not the people who surveyed and planned the road for not thinking hard to find alternatives to cutting the trees.
Nature always turns out to be a handy sacrificial goat. It is easy to cut the trees and the claim is that they can always plant double or triple of the trees that were cut. But nobody wants to find alternatives to cutting trees or destroying the environment. The trees at Upper Shillong are pine trees which only encourage monoculture anyway. The pine trees are not endemic to the area and they do not sustain life are some of the arguments.
A tree is a living being it has been part of the ecology. The scenic beauty of the area that trees have existed in the area for decades. Hence it is also part of the culture of the area. In the case of the trees at Upper Shilong, the trees have also provided oxygen to innumerable travellers who passed through the area. Like a human, a tree is no different from any living being. The trees at Upper Shillong are unique and they have been there for decades and nothing can replace a grown up tree even if we plant hundreds of trees.
Those who raised their voice against the cutting of the pine trees were asked, why they are not protesting against the cutting of trees elsewhere in the state? They all of a sudden were compelled to be the protectors all the forest in the state just for raising their question against the cutting of the said trees. Ironically neither the Forest Department of the Autonomous District Councils nor the Forest Department of the State Government were asked the same question. This is similar to asking the women of the Chipko movement why don’t you also go and protest against the destruction of Amazon forest. Is this even fair?
It is heartening to see that the advocacy for environment protection which has started more than three decades ago and found no takers then has finally come of age in Meghalaya. Three decades ago a cry against illegal coal mining was a cry in the wilderness. Now there is a group known as Environment Coordination Committee in Sutnga who protest against the mushrooming of coke factories in the area. Similarly the protest against the limestone mining at Brichyrnot is also being partly led by the KSU Narpuh circle. This would be unthinkable in Narpuh area a decade or so earlier.
Indeed fighting for the environment has to be selective if it is to be effective. It has to be something close to one’s heart. It could be to protect a park, a lake near one’s house, a small forest or the river like what is happening with the river Myntdu in Jowai. Surely, we cannot ask people in Jowai who fight to keep Myntdu, why didn’t they also protest against the destruction of Wah Umkhrah? That would be ridiculous.
Indigenous people are recognised the world over as custodians of bio-diversity. People have sacred relationships with their lands and their forests. The relationship is sacred because it is both a spiritual and cultural bond which is unique only to the people. It is also ironic that the predicament is happening near one of the famous sacred forests of the jaidbynriew Mawphlang Law Kyntang which best illustrates the truth that tradition and modernity can co-exist. Like all the indigenous people in the world the tribals of Meghalaya too are pulled between tradition and modernity but the people must not forego the profound connection that they have with nature. It is time that we hug and protect every tree that is being threatened because it is part of the ecosystem. We must remember that the trees that our ancestors planted and kept yesterday are the forests that we enjoy today and the trees that we are going to plant today are going to be forests that our children will enjoy tomorrow.
Development is of course needed, but the question is, at what cost. By any means development has to be sustainable and that is why we have the sustainable development goals. And it is the duty of the state to see that the common goals are achieved. The struggle to protect the environment is not only a never-ending tussle between development and conservation but is also a perpetual fight (inside every human soul) between greed and need. It is not one man or one woman’s fight nor it is one organisation’s fight but it is a collective fight that everyone must make. It calls to bear in mind the bigger picture that the threat of climate change is real and we can all do our part to mitigate the harmful effect. The point is that making a difference at the local level no matter how small the act is, is the need of the hour. It is back to the simple call to think globally and act locally.
Hence, if we think that the protest against cutting of trees at Upper Shillong is a knee jerk reaction, we are missing the forest for the trees.
Email [email protected]