The entire tribal population suffered, but the troubles of the shifting cultivators were rather unique. Because they were now being cajoled, or rather coerced by government agencies to change over to settled cultivation.

But the strategy was simply not working. Why? I will tell you the story of a few of the tribes who have played guinea pig in this ‘change over drama’:

Marias in Bastar: They were urged to opt for terrace farming to grow rice. They were very reluctant, because their native wisdom taught them that hill soil is too fragile and weak for terracing. Also that they would need more inputs—like expensive fer-tilisers and seeds, and this would make them completely dependable on government aid. But the Marias had little choice—shifting cultivation had been stopped by the state forest department. So they purchased seeds and build bunds, at their own expense. The promised government help never came, the rains failed that year, and so did the rice crop.

Saoras of Koraput: They, like the Marias, were forced to cultivate terraced fields. But their cropping pattern changed due to this, and rice dominated. This completely disrupted the pattern of food consumption of the Saoras, who used to grow 10 to 11 varieties of crops—especially millet, their primecereal.

Tripuris in Agartala: In Tripura, 60 per cent of the forests have been ‘reserved’. Some of the families were herded down to settlements in the plains, with promises of leased plots in lieu of the forest land they left behind. They built their own bamboo huts and waited in vain for the government to make good its promise. They are still waiting. Some are inclined to go back. “There’s no land to jhumhere. If I don’t go back, we’ll starve,” says one of them. The tribal activists in the insurgency-ravaged Tripura are more vocal. “If this is ‘development’, our youth shall be forced to take up arms with renewed vigour,” they threaten.

Finding answers
So the situation is pretty critical…the discontent among the tribals is simmering, ready to boil over. Is there a way to prevent it from exploding —to ensure that the future of these slash and burn farmers do not go up in smoke? Yes, say experts. But only if the government is prepared to think afresh. “We need a total break from the colonial mindset, and not try to impose a solution from above,” says Rangarajan. Like trying to impose a total ban on shifting cultivation, for example. That would certainly be a recipe for disaster. Because aided by modern technical support, jhum does have the potential to become a viable, sustainable production tool for these margin-alized, impoverished tribal farmers.

“I have always pleaded that models built in experimental plots, far removed from real life situations will just not work. We must involve the local communities and use their ageold wisdom to find a way,” says Ramakrishnan.

A glow in the dark
And the good news is that the government seems to be paying heed to these voices. At last. The tone of the policy makers began to thaw around the late 1980s.Here is how it has happened till now:

The Forest Policy, 1988 stressed that ‘forests are a first charge to the tribal communities and their domestic and livelihood needs are paramount and superior to any other commercial needs.

The National Forest Policy of 1988, recognized the customary rights and interests of the tribal people. It also highlighted the need to provide gainful employment to the people living in and around the forest.

The Scheduled Tribes (Recognition of Forest) Rights Bill, 2005, acknowledges that despite all the existing legislative/ policy framework, the historical rights of the tribals have not been recognised by the Indian government till date. And the Ministry of Tribal Affairs would take steps to enact a new law that will remove this‘historical injustice’ and clearly assert their legal rights on land.