Editor,
Apropos the clarification of the Principal Secretary (Fisheries), (ST dated Mar 26, 2012) the writer wishes to state that he stands corrected on the duration of the state aqua-culture. However the feasibility of the project, particularly in West Khasi Hills, as in most parts of Khasi Hills is still debatable.
The project suffers from inherent biases as it is comparatively more viable for Garo Hills. It would have been more appropriate for the government to adopt different projects for different regions of the state, as per their topography, climate and soil quality, vis-a-vis minerals and natural resources available. The government would no doubt have to devote larger chunk of resources for rural improvement and empowerment. Also the level of investment would be limited vis-à-vis the demand. Hence the allocated resources (amount) should therefore be equitably distributed/allocated between hundreds of possible projects around the state.
I apologise to my friends from Garo Hills, if they see this write-up as being anti-Achik, I would also like to clarify that I am not even anti-government. This is in fact being presented to highlight the feeling of discrimination and alienation of the people of West Khasi Hills. It is a serious attempt to lay some of the intellectual foundations for policy in dealing with this divisive idea. We really have nothing to say about how equitable the project is. But as citizens we may, of course, have strong opinions about such matters, but again who will say or who will decide about what is just or what is right ?
I would request the officials of the Fisheries Department to see to it that all targeted ponds should not replace the meager cultivable land available to us, as is happening in most parts of Ri Bhoi and also parts of East and West Khasi Hills. Self-sufficiency in fish production alone is not enough. We require food grains as rice is our staple food.
Yours etc.,
Wanshan.B.Khardewsaw
Shillong – 02
