Robbed of their lives

Robbed of their lives

http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Robbed+of+their+lives&artid=45OL1PbTIxE=&SectionID=f4OberbKin4=&MainSectionID=b7ziAYMenjw=&SectionName=cxWvYpmNp4fBHAeKn3LcnQ==&SEO=Tamil%20Nadu,%20%20Gulf%20of%20Mannar;%20Velammal,%20%20seaweed%20co


G Saravanan
First Published : 06 Mar 2009 02:29:00 PM IST


For Velammal, a seaweed collector from Chinnapalem fishing hamlet near
the Gulf of Mannar in southeastern Tamil Nadu, the concept of a Marine
Protected Area is nothing less than a direct attack on her only
available livelihood — seaweed collection.

Not only has Velammal, a mother of two, been humiliated by forest
officials for venturing ‘illegally’ into the Mannar area for seaweed
collection, but there are also around 5,000 women from various fishing
communities in the area whose livelihood is threatened.

India’s marine and coastal ecosystems constitute an important natural
resource, with millions of people dependent on them. The Marine
Protected Areas (MPAs) were conceived to conserve dwindling marine
resources.They were implemented by the government in the late 1960s.
However, the MPAs have increasingly become tools that limit, forbid and
control human (traditional fishermen) activity through a structure of
rights and rules.

Velammal and other women like her can’t understand the issues, because
the community has always looked to the sea for resources and employment.
The sea is an integral part of their identity, and women have been
collecting seaweed for decades. “We started collecting seaweed regularly
in the 1970s. But things have gone awry after the demarcation of the
area as protected,” says Parvathi, another seaweed collector from
Chinnapalem.

With the MPA now defined, seaweed collection in the Gulf of Mannar has
been seriously curtailed. Officials prohibit women from venturing to 21
tiny islands, rich sources of seaweed. In several instances, these women
have fallen foul of the authorities and have been subjected to
harassment for entering the protected area.

The women are not the only sufferers. The restrictions have robbed more
than 10 per cent of the fishermen of a sustained livelihood. They are
forced to adapt to a new environment to eke out a living. “For
traditional fishermen, sea is the only resource. They cannot be easily
accommodated into another profession,” says K Bharathi, president of the
South Indian Fishermen’s Welfare Association. “They are better
protectors of marine ecology,” he adds, “and conservation cannot be
decided without considering their (traditional fishermen) views.”

Chandrika Sharma of the International Collective in Support of
Fishworkers (ICSF) says fishermen everywhere are facing the same
situation. “We are concerned about the livelihood problems of
traditional fishermen from unfair restrictions on their operations in
the course of implementing MPAs.”

The first MPA was designated in 1967 for the protection of wetlands and
of migrant birds, even before a specific legal framework for protected
areas was put in place. According to statistics, there are 31 MPAs in
India, designated mainly in the 1980s and early 1990s. The main MPAs in
mainland India are the Gulf of Mannar national park and biosphere
reserve, Gahirmatha wildlife sanctuary (Orissa), Gulf of Kutch nati­onal
park and wildlife sanctuary (Gujarat), Malvan (marine) wildlife
sanctuary (Maharashtra) and Sunderbans national park and biosphere
reserve (West Bengal). The Andaman and Nicobar islands too has several
protected areas.

In any case, she adds, the true culprits of habitat destruction are not
traditional fishermen. The worst damage is from untreated urban waste,
agricultural runoff and industrial activity, all of which add up to
indiscriminate pollution and widespread habitat degradation.

“But traditional fishing communities bear economic, sociocultural and
environmental costs, while the benefits often go to outsiders,
particularly the tourist industry.”

According to Chandrika, there can be no success without the full and
active participation of (traditional) fishing communities in decision-
making at all stages of the MPA process. These communities should be
seen as rights holders, not stakeholders, and community-led initiatives
for management and conservation should be recognised and supported.

Though the government introduced the Marine Protected Area concept
nearly four decades ago, its inability to mark the boundary till today
has raised questions about its zeal for conservation, says M Sakthivel,
former chairman and director of the Marine Products Export Development
Authority.

Sakthivel was involved in propagating seaweed farming among the Mannar
fisher folk, and he says the approach has been conservative and
top-down. The focus is on keeping people out, hence the success of
conservation through MPAs stands as a distant dream.

Before punishing the traditional fishermen, who do not have any other
option but to live in the same areas, the government should place some
markers (like floating buoys) to indicate to them that they have entered
a protected area, Sakthivel added.

The international experience favours his thesis. Participatory models of
conservation and resource management have been found more effective in
protecting both livelihoods and biodiversity, and communities can be
powerful

allies in efforts for conservation and management of coastal and marine
resources.

— saravanan.gee@gmail.com