Introduction When the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Act, 2006, popularly known as ‘Forest Right Act’ came into existence, the Indian government raised the hope among the tribal communities, in terms of the secured livelihood and reduced vulnerability. The highlight behind the enactment of this act was the historic injustice done to forest-dwelling communities, particularly in the tribal areas of India. This act acknowledged the sufferings undergone by the forest dependent people since the initiation of modern forest administration under the British rule and it has been a reason to regret that the same policies were carried forward into independent India. Anyway, the year 2006 could be said a new beginning when the Ministry of Tribal Affairs got the act. The act promises to realise the claims of tribal and other forest dwelling communities over the dwelling and cultivation of forest land as their livelihood generating activities. The act also provides the complete rights on the non-timber forest produce, NTFP, minor forest produce and management and protection rights over resources which also includes the community rights given to the different forest dependent communities. The process of implementation of this act begins right from the Gram Sabha where Forest Right Committees gets power and authority to assist and verify the approval of claims made by the people. The act becomes more important for the states having large tribal population and large forest cover. In this context, the state Jharkhand comes in front when we talk about tribal population vis-à-vis rights given to them under forest right act. The mass exploitation of the natural resources available in the state has become a grave matter of c... ... middle of paper ... ...e challenges and ambiguity, Forest Right Act in Jharkhand has been stuck in between the petty politics and bureaucratic logjam. People are bearing the cost and government is enjoying the fruits, which should not be the case, rather it should be a win-win situation for both the parties. References: • Bandi Madhusudan, 2013, Implementation of Forest Rights Act: Undoing Historical Injustices, Economic and Political Weekly, vol XLVIII, page 21-24 • Das Victor, 1991, Forest and Tribals of Jharkhand, Economic and Political Weekly, page 275-277 • Hebbar Ritambhara, 2006, Forest Bill 2005 and Tribal Areas: Case of Jharkhand, Economic and Political Weekly, page 4952-4955 • The State of the Forest Rights Act: Undoing of historical injustice withered, Asian Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Network, ISBN: 978-81-907996-3-8 • http://www.jharkhandforest.com/index.aspx
The Grassy Narrows (Asubpeeschoseewagong) First Nation is an Ojibwa First Nation located north of Kenora, ON. The community has been fighting against environmental injustices imposed on them from various actors over the last 40 years (Rodgers, 2009, para. 10), involving issues with mercury poisoned fish (para. 1) clear cutting of their lands (para. 27) and subsequent degradation of their land, water and food sources. This essay will detail the environmental justice struggles of the Grassy Narrows First Nation, point out the unfair treatment and environmental racism they have been subject to and will also question the role that authority, power and litigation have played within the community.
It does so by mandating 100% maintenance of culturally modified trees (CMT), which are trees that have been previously modified by the Haida people (Province of British Columbia and Council of the Haida Nation, 2007). TEK is a way of knowing that accumulates observations outside of Western science, thus it is a knowledge that is encoded in rituals and cultural practices (Berkes et al., 2000). Recently, there has been increased recognition in the contributions that TEK can make to the conservation of biodiversity, protected areas, ecological processes, and sustainable resource use (Berkes et al., 2000). CMTs are a form of TEK as they can provide tangible records of historical human use of trees and information on traditional sustainable resource use (Turner et al., 2009). These trees are living models that humans can enable use of their wood, bark, roots, and leaves without destroying the tree itself (Turner et al., 2009). Thus they are an important tool for ecosystem-based management, as according to Galindo-Leal & Bunnell (1995), management should meet the needs of the present but not compromise the ability of future generations to do the same. Additionally, preservation of CMTs is particularly important for the Haida, as most traditional knowledge has been lost due to the passing on of
The Forest Reserve Act reduced destructive logging and preserved watersheds which led to the establishment of national forests’.
An issue facing society is whether the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), is sufficient in balancing the rights of Indigenous Australians and the rights of current land owners. To determine whether legislation is sufficient and fair, an investigation into the current societal view points needs to be considered by legislators, with an evaluation into the ways in which other societies cater to the needs of Indigenous land owners should be made. This information then allows recommendations and changes to be debated, to therefore to ensure more equitable legislation on land rights within Australia.
...tes in each areas. Once a valuable natural resources is discovered on a reservation, the government desires they should be able to mine it, however the natives won't permit it. They are saying that it's their land which the government has no claim to that.
Despite protecting millions of acres of wilderness, this act provided for the numerous groups of people affected by the establishment of this law. Stipulations regarding the use of protected lands by private landowners were made. People living inside the park lands were guaranteed the right to subsistence hunting and fishing, as well as the guaranteed access to their lands. This right of access is the main concern for this argument, as it is a major management issue for park officials and land owners alike.
Flanagan, Thomas. "Native sovereignty: Does Anyone Really want an Aboriginal Archipelago?". In Crosscurrents: Contemporary Political Issues, 3rd ed. ed. Mark Charlton and Paul Barker, 9-15. Toronto: Nelson, 1998.
The Indian Act no longer remains an undisputable aspect of the Aboriginal landscape in Canada. For years, this federal legislation (that was both controversial and invasive) governed practically all of the aspects of Aboriginal life, starting with the nature of band governance and land tenure. Most importantly, the Indian act defines qualifications of being a “status Indian,” and has been the source of Aboriginal hatred, due to the government attempting to control Aboriginals’ identities and status. This historical importance of this legislation is now being steadily forgotten. Politically speaking, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal critics of the Indian act often have insufferable opinions of the limits of the Indian Act’s governance, and often argue to have this administrative device completely exterminated. Simultaneously, recent modern land claim settlements bypass the authority of the Indian Act over specific groups.
In August 2002, President Bush launched his revolutionary campaign against wildfires known as the Healthy Forest Initiative (HFI). The President’s dynamic plan centers on preventing massive forest fires by thinning the dense undergrowth and brush commonly seen in our national forests. The thinning will occur in priority areas that are in close proximity to homes and watersheds. The Healthy Forest Initiative also aims at developing a more efficient response method to disease and insect infestations that sabotage our forests. Finally, if fully enacted, the Healthy Forest Initiative would provide the loggers with what is known as “goods for services”. This will compensate the loggers for the financial burden that will surface as a result of this aggressive thinning (http://www.sierraclub. org/forests /fires/healthyforests initiative.asp). In order to promote the progress of his Healthy Forest Initiative, in 2003 President Bush announced the Healthy Forest Restoration Act. This act took the main issues discussed in the Healthy Forest Initiative a step further. Bush plans to make a collaborative effort with federal, state, tribal, and local officials to protect our woodlands against future infernos. The act also calls for more public participation in reviewing any actions taken in lieu of the Healthy Forest Initiative. Furthermore, Bush wants to restore the land that has already been destroyed by wildfires and help to recover the threatened and endangered species that were affected by the fires (http://www.
Humans have been changing the Western forests' fire system since the settlement by the Europeans and now we are experiencing the consequences of those changes. During the summer of 2002, 6.9 million acres of forests was burnt up in the West (Wildland Fires, 1). This figure is two times the ten year annual average, and it does not look like next summer will be any better (Wildfire Season, 1). Foresters have been trying to restore the forests back to their original conditions by thinning and prescribed fires but have encountered countless delays. Politicians are proposing sweeping changes in bills, which have caused great controversy, in efforts to correct the problems that the Forest Service has faced in restoration projects. Are these bills necessary or is there a better solution that politicians are overlooking?
Perhaps the biggest failure in the reservation system affecting current times is in the status of laws and jurisdiction. Communal land ownership and federal trust restrictions on land ownership and use inhibit economic development and many land allotments are owned collectively by groups of individuals. Multiple ownership makes it difficult to manage the lands and it reduces benefits to individuals. It is also nearly impossible to use the land as collateral for obtaining loans because of federal protection from encumbrances on trust
Today most natural resources within Native American land are managed in trust by the federal government meaning that in order to explore or develop resources on Indigenous land; tribe members must face a long and costly process to take advantage of the resources they own. (Regan, 2014). For ...
An examination of forest destruction on a regional basis reveals that this is not so. In fact it is large companies and the inequities of international trade which are the root causes of rainforest destruction. For instance, millions of hectares of primary rainforests are being destroyed in South East Asia by logging, and the driving force in this industry is not the local population but international demand for timber. Because landless people will follow logging roads into primary rainforest areas, it is the logging industry which is the main immediate factor responsible for colonisation of rainforest.
The Australian Rainforest Memorandum, which recognizes the rights of traditional land owners is endorsed by over 40 NGO’s. Working Towards an end to foreign debt is yet another crucial role to ending deforestation. The condition imposed by the International Monetary Fund often forces heavily indebted countries to sell their national resources far in excess of sustainable exploitation.
Scheduled Tribes who inhabit isolated mountainous regions were not appropriated into the agriculture based kingdoms of the plains, in the absence of easy communication and transport facilities. Kosambi identifies the spread of Brahmanism and its rigid subordination of individual to social function with the spread of a more productive agrarian order. According to the Census of 2001, the Scheduled Tribes, constitute 8.1% of the Indian population. In absolute terms, this comes to some 83.6 million people, classified under 461 different communities. They are spread over the entire country but are most heavily concentrated in central, eastern and north-eastern India. Two broad types of scheduling viz. area based and community based exist for tribes. Areas under the Fifth Schedule belong to nine major states of western and central region extending from Maharashtra on the West to Jharkhand in the East. Vulnerable tribal populations of some states are left out however, such as in West Bengal, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala. The Sixth Schedule applies to tribal areas in states of the North East.