Save the Terai/Madhesh by Conserving Churia Hills:

Environmental Services Perspective and Role of I/NGOs

 

By:Bijay Kumar Singh

Independent Researcher

Key Areas in the Presentation• Status of deforestation and forest degradation

in Churia Hills• Impact of deforestation and forest degradation

in the Terai/Madhesh• Interlinkages between Churia and Terai from

the perspective of environmental services.• Stakeholder perspective and

inclusion/exclusion issue in the conservation and management of Churia Hills

Objective of the Paper

• to share a burning environmental issue which is directly affecting Terai/Madhesh for survival but not remained priority issue of those who are claiming themselves struggling for the welfare of Terai/Madhesh.

Introduction• Fragile and environmentally sensitive Churia hills • Terai – Called “grainary for Nepal”• Siltation in Terai from Churia hills

– People loosing fertile and productive grounds– Challenging  the food security– Increasing number of landless family or marginalized households due to loosing land each year

• Landuse changes in Churia hills– Deforestation in fragile Churia - Encroachment– Forest degradation– Rapid degradation of  sub-watersheds in Churia hills

Churia hills - 13% land of Nepal

Churia Hill 28% in Dhanusha District

Case Study of Jalad River in Dhanusha District

Old Jagadhar Stream

Bhabar

Terai

Jalad River

Length of Jalad River

Location km Cumulative length (km)

Churia Hill Area (m) Sindhuli border to Churia Hills

10.91 10.91

Churia foot hill to EW Highway: 3.65 14.56EW Highway - Water spring 5.11 19.67Water spring- Hardinath irrigation canal

7.09 26.76

Irrigation canal - Janakpur railway 17.76 44.52Janakpur railway to Indian Border 10.72 55.24

Total 55.24  

Area of Jalad Watershed

SN Location Forest area (hectare)

Total Area (hectare)

1 Forest area in Churia hills 3491.56 3530.00

2 Foothill forest area 18.56 613.00

3 Forest patch crossing East-West Highway

31.88

Total (85% forest) 3542 4143.00

Methodology

• Forest inventory• Household Survey• Measurement of river width• Consultations & interview• Secondary data review

Independent Variables

Biophysical Distance of River-Affected Stakeholders

Dependent Variables

Forestry Sector Policies

Forestry sector Programs

Forestry sector practices

Upstream stakeholders

Midstream stakeholders

Downstream stakeholders

Inclusion/ Exclusion of river-affected stakeholders in the conservation and management of Churia hills

Conceptual Framework of the Study

Grouping of the VDCs

VDC Located in West-side of River

Jalad River Flow

N

S

VDC Located in East -side of River

Churia hills Churia hills

Upstream Hariharpur PushpalpurMidstream Sakhuwa

Mahendra NagarDigamberpur

Gopalpur Tarapatti SirsiyaDownstream Baniniya Kachuri Thera

Laxmipur BagewaBanaiga Shivpur

Sample Size for Social Survey

Stream Affected HHS

Sample HHS

Sample %

Upstream 317 116 36.59

Midstream 539 212 39.33

Downstream 779 299 38.38

Grand Total 1635 627 38.35

Institutional Start of Deforestation in Janakpur Area since 1934 by Establishment of Janakpur Railway

Grazing in the Jalad Sub-watershed

• Grazing in one-day walking - for the whole year

• Keeping Goth (animal shed outside forest) - in rainy reasons (4 months) - midstream villagers

• keeping Goth in Interior area of Churia hills for 8 months (other than rainy season) - 8-10 animal shed ranging 450-500 animals

• Estimated about 1400 animals grazed daily in Jalad sub-watershed

Forest condition in Jalad watershed

New Encroachment in Jalad Sub-watershed of Churia hills

Soil erosion condition in Jalad Watershed

Washed away soil by rainwater due to lack of vegetation

Forest Inventory by the Research Team

Forest condition in Jalad Subwatershed of Chure hills

SN Forest condition Trees per hectare

Gaps

1 Number of trees (more than 30 cm diameter)

18.87 5.37% of poles

2 Number of poles (10-30 cm diameter)

351.15 13.82% of saplings

3 Number of saplings (more than 1 meter tall and diameter less than 10 cm)

2539.30 58.51% of regeneration

4 Regeneration (less than 1 m. seedling of tree species)

4346.00

Impact of Jalad river from upstream to downstream

Maps and Photographs speak itself on impacts of Jalad river 

1992 2005

Jaga

dhar

Kho

la

Chamain

iya K

hola

Jala

dh

Kh

ola

Jaga

dhar

Kho

la

Chamain

iya K

hola

Jala

dh

Kh

ola

Active Jagadhar Dead Jagadhar

570m

70m

680m

340m

Jalad-Chamainiya Confluence

1992 2007

Desertification by Jalad river in downstream - width 680 meter

Local political leaders discussing with local people on Jalad river impacts

River bank-cutting by Jalad river in downstream

840m, 2005

710m, 1996Chheripokhar

Chheripokhar

351m138m

Bridge in the middle of Jalad river - showing its previous width

A well in the middle of Jalad river - An evidence of previous settlement

Another well in the middle of Jalad river - An evidence of previous settlement

Katarait, 2005

1996

Way to Dhanushadham

980m

325m

Loss of Land by Siltation and River Bank Cutting per Year

Study Area Year Year Difference in Hectare

Land loss by River Per Year

1996 2005 10 year

Area of Jaladh River in 10 VDCs, Dhanusha

878.1 ha

1130 ha

252 ha 25.2 ha/yr

2000 2007 7 year

Area of Chandi River from foot hill to Bagmati river, Rautahat

807 ha 996 ha 189 27.0 ha/yr

Other Impacts• Three villages - completely displaced

– Magar tole of Pushpalpur VDC– Chheri Pokhar Village of Digamberpur VDC– Katrait Village of Katrait VDC

• About 150 households displaced• Out of 627 HHS interviewed 107 households

completely lost their lands• 27% households have converted from farmer to

agriculture laborer due to loss of their lands

Loss or Damage of Public Properties by Jalad River

Loss or Damage of Public Property NumberIrrigation canal 18School 4Pond 15Road (partly) 18Well 19Bridge/Culvert 13Public land 138 haGuthi land 101 ha

Hardinath Irrigation over Jalad River - Reduced discharge of irrigation water due to over siltation in dams and canals

Environmental Services

• Carbon sink functions

• Biodiversity conservation

• Landscape aesthetics/ecotourism

• Regulating services or watershed services–  Climate regulation, – Floods, water regulation, – Water purification, – Drought, – Land degradation, detoxification.

Linking Upstream-Downstream from the Perspective of Environmental Services

• Link Churia hills and Terai – not for the forest products but for the environmental services (watershed services) on priority basis.

• Save the Terai (grain bucket of Nepal) from siltation of Churia hills which is a negative product (environmental product) of Churia hill degradation.

• Destruction of productive land in Terai by rivers will create permanent food deficit in Terai.

Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory (2001)

• Stakeholders “group and individuals who benefit from or are harmed by, and whose rights are violated or respected by corporate actions”.

• Stakeholders included all affecters and affectees or corporate policies and activities (i.e. relevant interests).

• Stakeholders are identified through actual or potential harms and benefits that they experience or anticipate experiencing as a result of the firm’s actions or inactions (Donaldson and Preston, 1995:85)

SOCIAL EXCLUSION• Social exclusion can be understood as

"the inability of an individual to participate in the basic political, economic and social functioning of the society in which s/he lives (Tsakloglou and Papadopoulos, 2001).

• Social inclusion can refer to a state or situation, but it often refers to process, to the mechanisms by which people are excluded.

Inclusion/exclusion in Community Forestry

VDC Category

Total HHS

Interviewed

Membership in CF

Membership in CF Executive

CommitteeNo. of HHS

Percent No. of HHS

Percent

Upstream VDCs

116 18 15.52 8 6.90

Midstream VDCs

212 0 0 0 0

Downstream VDCs

299 0 0 0 0

Total 627 18 2.87 8 1.28

Conclusion• River-affected downstream people - not

recognized as stakeholder nor included in the conservation and management of forest resources of Churia hills

• Over-exploitation of resources in the Churia hills by upstream and middle to satisfy human needs is main reason for degradation and siltation in downstream

• Churia hills is source of Siltation, thus, its conservation is main action to reduce siltation in down stream.

Role of I/NGO• Nationally recognize Churia Hills and Terai/Madhesh -

interdependent and interrelated ecological zone. • Landuse in Churia hills according to its sensitivity.• Adopt upstream-downstream approach• Devise institutional mechanism, policy, programs to

include upstream and downstream people in the conservation of Churia hills.

• The role of I/NGOs is instrumental to make aware people on environmental services and also pressurize the government agencies to recognize in the policy and programs.

Ecologically, Churia hill is an integral part of Terai. It can not separated from Terai in the forthcoming restructuring of states

THANKS !Welcome to queries 

and interests!