|Category of CCA||Defined|
|Number of households||35|
|Number of people||142|
Khanguri village is located about 15 Km away from the district headquarters Nayagarh and about 3 Km from Koska, the much popular village for CFM in the area. It is surrounded by Sanahamara village in the East, Sandhamara village in the West, Koska khesra forest on the south and Hatimunda Reserve Forest to the North. It comes under Nayagarh forest range under Nayagarh forest division. It is approachable from District Headquarters by Nayagarh – Khandapara road via Panipoila square. There is no public transportation system to reach the village. The village has only 74.28 Acres of unirrigated cultivable land out of which 14 Acre is upland, 50 acre is medium land and 10.28 acres is low land. The medium lands are relatively better in terms of cultivation as they enjoy the advantage of seepage flow from uplands. The low lands remain moist and only after rain recedes they are cultivated with long duration paddy. The uplands are degraded due to massive soil erosion in the past and gravels have been exposed on such lands rendering them apparently unsuitable for cultivation.
Khanguri is a small tribal village of 35 Households distributed by SC, ST and OBC families with a total population of 142. Amongst the households, 12 households belong to general category, 11 households belong to scheduled castes and 12 households belong to scheduled tribes. Out of the 35 households, 10 households live in a hamlet habitation closer to the main village. The caste composition among the OBC families is Keuta (Fishermen), Tanti (Weaver) and Chasa (Cultivator). The village is identified with the nearest villages Sandhamara and Sampada. All these three villages have chosen to operate as Vana Samrakshyan Samiti (VSS) for forest protection and management under Joint Forest Management (JFM). The economic status of the community depends on their occupation and size of land holding. Among the households 4 households are landless, 19 households are marginal farmers and the rest are small farmers. Hence the villagers have different levels of dependence on the forest resources. The socio-economic status of the people is not so well as they still continue to live at a subsistence level. Hardly they get a buffer stock from annual agricultural harvests. Their household economy is supplemented by sale of fruits and sale of NTFPs in the local market. The villagers care for the fruit and trees under their possession. As such, there are 40 mango trees, 23 drumstic trees, 7 tamarind trees, 17 jackfruit trees, 15 bamboo bushes and 20 coconut trees under private possession by the households. Thus, their survival strategy revolves around agriculture, wage earning, cash income by out-migration, sale of NTFP and fuel wood, and small units of animal husbandry.
|Origin||New initiative by community|
|Year of Formation||-|
The forest in the past was an open access regime where people from different villages were having access to collect varieties of forest produces, fuelwood and timber. Due to unrestricted open access and indiscriminate exploitation of forest resources, the forest got depleted. There were many open areas in the forest created due to over exploitation and illegal timber smuggling. The forest was rich with Piasal trees which were felled by smugglers. At that time, there were abundant wildlife like barking deer, rabbits, bears, snakes and birds living within the semi-evergreen forests dominated by Sal, Sissoo, Kuruma, Dhaura, Asan, Karada and bamboo. The forests fostered enormous biodiversity. The realization of the future crisis due to fast depletion of forest resources was realized by the village elders. Thus, around 1978, the village elders called for the conservation of the forests. The village started protecting the local forests about 25 years ago responding to the realization of crises in forest produces and also motivated by the forest protection activities in the neighboring villages, particularly being inspired by the villagers of Koska. When the protection activities were started, the forest was virtually gone and the terrain was full of exposed rocks due to massive soil erosion. The villagers got some motivation from Koska and organized themselves for protecting whatever remnant vegetation was there and by controlling the extraction of wood for fuel. They facilitated natural regeneration in the area. No traditional belief system was associated with the forest. As the village community presented during the course of discussion with them, village community had taken several initiatives to discuss and negotiate with neighbouring villages for conservation and restrict open access into the forest. They were not getting any cooperation from neighbouring villages except Koska in order to conserve the forest. The village leadership had created informal rule systems in the village to limit extraction of forest produces. The villagers were willingly abiding by the informal rules set in the village. However, the neighbouring villages did not care for the rules developed by the villagers of Khanguri. They had to struggle hard to make others respect the rules and regulations and the regulatory mechanisms developed by the village to facilitate natural regeneration over the patch of forest under protection. Some neighbouring villages were continuously exploiting the forest under protection. In order to check the exploitation of forests by neighbouring villages the villagers of Khanguri decided to take help of the larger networks working on forest protection in the neighborhood. In the Nuagaon block there was no well-known network working on the forest protection hence they sought help of the network of the cluster of villages in Nayagarh block (the present Anchalika Hatimunda Jungle Surakhya Committee) to which Koska was providing leadership. Thus, they associated themselves with the cluster network and that helped in reducing the pilferage, theft and interference of other villages into the forests under protection by Khanguri.
1) around 1978, the village elders called for the conservation of the forests.
2) in 2008, the village institutionalised JFM in the name of Maa Brahmanidevi Vana Samrakhyan Samiti (VSS)
Meeting the livelihood and economic requirements from the forest was and has been the key objective of conservation. Every household in the village have small cattle units and the forest has been meeting the requirements for fodder. The villagers are agriculturists primarily and hence they used to gather construction materials from the forest and other necessary requirements like agricultural implements. Biodiversity conservation was not the objective which they could visualize in the beginning. Although no strict religious objective was there yet people in the village religiously protected the forest to maintain their livelihood and economic requirements. The villagers viewed that during the 1980s they were having relatively larger units of cattle with them. That apart, the goat population made major counts in their animal husbandry units owing to the fodder availability in the forests. Keeping in pace with the depletion of forest resources, their animal husbandry units became smaller and smaller contributing to their economic marginalization. Thus, apart from NTFP collection and sale, the need of fodders was considered to be a major forest conservation objective for the villagers. As articulated by the villagers, a major objective of protecting the forest was to maintain solidarity with many other villages and the regional Hatimunda forest protection federation who were dedicatedly engaging themselves in forest protection.
|Collective of CCAs||Yes|
|Decision Making Body||JFM committee , Others → Forest protection committee|
|Rules and Regulations||Formal|
|Community activities through the year||Patrolling, watch and ward, Plantations and restoration activities|
The local federation of forest protection committees called Anchalika Hatimunda Jungle Surakhya Committee) also helped Khanguri in their mission by passing ordeal to neighbouring villages to not exploit the forests protected by Khanguri. It is noteworthy that the local federation of FPCs was working under the leadership of Koska FPC. Thus, the Khanguri village associated itself with the cluster network and that helped in reducing the pilferage, theft and interference of other villages into the forests under protection by Khanguri.
The village entered into negotiation with forest department and the village committee became known as Khanguri VSS. All the families of the village are included in the VSS. Two persons per family which is the family head male and female became the members of the committee as per the VSS constitution guidelines. The members took up watch and ward activities on rotation basis. However, on the other hand they have been maintaining close coordination with the cluster level committee of CFM villages otherwise pilferage and theft from the forest under protection by Khanguri VSS would be difficult to be controlled. Inspired by Khanguri its neighboring villages Sampur and Sandhamara also adopted JFM mode of operation. All the families represented by man and woman of the family are included in the VSS. Through the JFM the village has got some assistance under entry point activities and plantation programs. During the inception year of the VSS, the villagers took up plantation over 15 hectares coming under revenue forest area assisted by the forest department. The able members from each household participated in the plantation program and earned wages. The villagers jointly with the forest department officials had selected the species to be planted that includes teak, sissoo, karanja, chakunda, harida, bahada, amla and bamboo. The villagers irrespective of any discrimination participated in the several Aided Natural Regeneration (ANR) operations conducted by the forest department in subsequent years. Their involvement in ANR activities through the years has contributed to increase the vegetation density in the Reserved forest. There have been involvement of multiple agencies including the forest department, the forest protection committees in the neighbouring villages and the federations of forest protection committees at different levels. The villagers acknowledge the contributions of the Koska forest protection committee in shaping up the protection and conservation agenda. They were inspired and empowered by them. The Koska FPC for years together managed to negotiate with the neighbouring villages to stop having open access and indiscriminate exploitations from the forests protected by villagers of Khanguri. Since 2008, subsequent to formation of VSS the forest department officials have been providing help and support to the villagers of Khanguri towards accomplishment of the integral objectives of forest protection, conservation and management. The forest department also initiated the process of forming self help groups (SHGs) in the village to deal with NTFPs and their value addition for fetching better price in the market. The forest department has also provided training to villagers on ANR and sylvicultural practices. The role of NGOs, however, is very limited in the context of forest conservation and management in Khanguri. The most remarkable thing is that the villages in the neighbourhood who have been advocating the CFM do not discriminate the Khanguri village because it took to JFM. This contributes to building of solidarity for a common purpose of forest protection and conservation.
DECISION MAKING SYSTEMS
The decisions are taken democratically in VSS meetings. In certain cases, the decision making was mediated by the forest department officials. After formation of VSS, the meetings were being conducted regularly every month and various matters pertaining to conservation of forests towards strengthening the household economy are usually discussed. The decisions on plantation and ANR activities are taken jointly by the leadership of VSS and the forest department officials. The VSS decides the number of members to participate in the plantation works and ANR activities for wage earning in order to maintain equity in wage earning and other benefits. The VSS executive body is constituted with 11 members. Sometimes decisions are also taken by the executive body without convening the general body. The executive body decides the work plans within the forests under protection by them. They supervise the rotation wise watch and ward activities, soil and moisture conservation activities and participation of wage earners, and such other works like plantation and ANR activities.
A set of rules and regulations were developed by the villagers of Khanguri that are religiously observed till date despite changing over from CFM to JFM. i) Three villages; Sandhamara, Khanguri and Sampur were collectively managing a patch of forest. Everyday three persons (one each from the three villages) were doing patrolling in the forest. Now the forest has been distributed in three parts after the three villages adopted JFM. ii) All the households living in the village have free access to forest for collection of dry wood, twigs, etc, to their needful. Nobody can keep a heavy stock without a reason and also cannot sell wood in market. iii) Once in a month the village committee sits for discussion and decisions. Matters like patrolling, contributions for any purpose relating to forest, seized materials, conflicts, etc are given due importance, heard and decided. iv) Penalty system: If anybody making any unauthorized access into the forest is reported to the village committee, the culprit is levied a fine of Rs. 10/- for the first time that becomes double and triple for the second and third time respectively. Even after that if the same person is detected of unauthorized trespassing then his material assets like cycle, cutting implements are seized. The offender is then send back to his village and the village committee to which he belongs is requested to take due action for his deliberate offence. By that the committee takes action against the offender and also compromises with the village committee who detected the offender. The host village also feel it a shame and hence charge the offender a heavy penalty for his crime. v) To fight against the vested interest groups and muscle power, relations and networking with neighboring villages is duly maintained vi) For making lofts to store straw, wood, harvested paddy, etc, all the families are provided equal quantity of poles, bamboo and other required material under direct supervision of the village committee. Those who need more may buy from those who needed less. vii) On thengapali matters there is no discrepancy or disagreement observed in the rule system. However, households headed by women and old and aged are spared from thengapali. There has been no major conflict among the people for quite sometime. Minor conflicts between individuals or families are resolved amicably. The people of Khanguri village do not have any serious conflict with any neighbouring village either. Any matter relating the forests, conflicts and collaborations on forest matters, any formal and informal issue based meetings are attended by villagers, sometimes with participation of villagers from Koska as intermediates. Over the years solidarity and trust has been well established with neighboring villages through mutual cooperation and collective choice arrangements.
The main resources extracted from the forests are fuel wood, NTFPs, construction materials and fodders. There is as such no inviolate zone in the forest, although the areas under plantation and ANR are least interfered.
|Community Forest Resource Rights (CFR)||-|
|Date of filing CFR claim||-|
|Level of CFR claim||-|
|Date of recognition of CFR claim||-|
|Management plan status||-|
|Land Ownership||Government owned → Forest Department, Government owned → Revenue Department, Community Owned|
|Other Recognised Status||-|
|Impact on Livelihoods and Subsistence||Firewood, Non-timber forest produce|
|Social Impacts||Community empowerment|
|Ecological Impact||Good diversity and population of wildlife, Improved/sustained ecological services|
|Internal Threats and Challenges||Lack of resources and pressures of poverty|
|External Threats and Challenges||-|
In Khanguri CCA, the floral diversity has increased manifold through years of protection activities. Now the forest flora comprises Kolimayee, Sal, Beeja, Sishu, Ashana, Gamhari, Sidha, Dantari, Nahalbeli, Naibahada, Kanteikoli and Bamboo. Medicinal plants and creepers like Chemedia Nai Siju, Khadi siju, Gangasiuli, Muturi, sadhua (fruit), Pitaari, Bhuin neem, Amla, Harida, Bahada, Katha manjuati, Mahula (locally known as Chhali), Bhuin kakharu (wild pumpkin), Pathar girdhini, Bel, Bhuin kalera, Chitramula, Gandha sunthi, Jhuna, Nageswar, Kusuma tel, Patala garuda, Sunari and Satabari are abundantly found. The faunal diversity spotted now includes wild boar, bear, barking deer, jackal, monkey, rabbit, peafowl, rats, Saliapatini, mangoose, pangolin, and snakes (Rana, Cobra, Rat killer, Python, Blind snake, Matibiradi, Chiti, etc). Birds observed in the forest include Gunduri, Mina, Bhalia Khai, Cuckoo, Wild Hen, Dahuka, Kite, Chila, Owl, etc. The impact of the conservation initiatives may be summarized as following:- i) Increased availability of NTFPs of several kinds round the year providing economic incentives to the dependent families ii) availability of tubers has increased contributing to the food availability for landless and forest dependent families iii) With the increase in biomass and fodder availability, the scope of animal husbandry in the village has expanded iv) Regular forest operations are providing opportunities for wage earning v) The soil moisture profile of agricultural lands is becoming better vi) Trust and cooperation of neighbouring villages has been well established as all are involved in forest protection activities whether following CFM ideal or JFM ideal vii) Through the VSS, the other sectors of village development are well addressed through Gram panchayat.
Effective legal policies under JFM, livelihoods benefits, cooperation of neighboring villages, forest protection federations are the core factors that have supported conservation.
Maintaining the forest protection activities with limited exploitations remains as a challenge on the face of poverty. The strengthening of SHGs towards setting up forest based enterprise is seen both as challenge and opportunity.
Seasonal migrations of youths and migration in search of work in the cities and industrial areas for round the year has been a means to sustain the livelihoods in many families. So community is planning to stop youth from migrating to other cities for their livelihood by generating sufficient work in the village.
|Data Source||By external entity with permission of community member|
|Year of Study||-|