Collection, Characterization and Conservation of Indigenous Rice varieties of Assam and Meghalaya

Gene Campaign & North East Centre for Rural Livelihood Research (NECR) 

Introduction:

Conservation of Agro biodiversity with special reference to the cereal crops is a major intellectual challenge before the agricultural scientists, policy makers and also farming communities and needs timely and adequate focus and attention from all the stakeholders.

The traditional practice of cultivating multiple varieties with agro climatic adoptability had the advantage of preventing pest and disease infestation to a greater level. It also provides for developing new varieties with desired traits for further agricultural development. However, due to the use of fewer HYVs over large areas for enhancing productivity and production has reduced the crop resistance to a lower level thereby requiring more chemical application as nutrient supplement and pesticides.

In India, particularly the North East, a secondary center of origin for rice, a large number of indigenous varieties existed suiting the local agro climatic condition. Under the extension programme run by the state department with the technical support of Assam Agricultural University a large number of these varieties disappeared from the field replaced by high yielding varieties with better yield potential. Loss of these varieties is genetic erosion since many of the good traits like disease resistance; flood resistance etc. also lost forever which could have helped in developing new plant varieties with additional traits.

The project was designed to collect and characterize a few indigenous rice varieties of Assam and Meghalaya, with a focus on their nutritional qualities for household food security of rural communities. It was tried to see the spread and abundance of these indigenous varieties together with their nutritional aspects.

Study look into the type of soil they grow, duration of crop life, whether they grow well on lowland or up land etc were scrutinized.

Rationale:

Rice is the major staple food for not only in Assam, but in entire North East region, which is a secondary centre of origin for indica cultivar. And very naturally Assam is home to many indigenous varieties of rice with three distinct rice seasons; namely- ahu (autumn paddy), boro (summer paddy) and Sali (winter paddy). Among these Sali paddy is the most popular and widely practiced one cultivated as submerged paddy with adequate standing water up to the maximum tillering stage. Assam also falls in a special agro-ecological zone in the country with different rainfall and weather patterns. There are some endemic varieties found in the region such as the sticky rice which is glutinous in character like as Bora dhan, the aromatic rice known as joha etc.

But with the expansion of area under HYVs and constant promotion of HYVs by the concerned authorities there is a genuine threat to the indigenous varieties, the area under which is fast shrinking, leading to a gradual process of genetic erosion.

An in depth study into the degree and extent of the gradual loss of these indigenous varieties with their causes and possibility of remedial measures and type of incentives required to conserve these varieties in situ is essential before they go extinct.

The cultural linkage to crop diversity is often overlooked since it is subtle in nature and requires minute observation to understand. For example, the popular cultural festival of Assam ,the Bihu, celebrated during three  times a  year is fully evolved out of an agrarian economy .Each of the three bihu is celebrated in different season of the crop length of the rice crop. Bohag  bihu or Rangali bihu is celebrated during the pre –seed sewing season, The kati bihu  or kongali is when  the crop attains milky  stage as  it attracts  insect pest and  therefore earthen lamps are  placed on the paddy field to act as light trap. It is said “kongali” which means lack of abundance, since the previous year’s stock is almost in exhaust and the new harvest is yet to happen. It is more about rituals than celebration or jubilation. “Magh Bihu “or the ‘Bhogali Bihu’ which means plenty in vernacular is celebrated after the harvest of the winter paddy, during the month of January.

The present study:

The study had precisely three components- collection, characterization and conservation of indigenous rice varieties of Assam and a few for Meghalaya.

The collected samples along with photograph have already been submitted. The variety list along with their agronomic characteristics and the future conservation strategy is furnished.

Collection of varieties:

The collection was done in Jorhat and Golaghat district of Upper Brahmaputra Valley Zone of Assam. In Jorhat Mallow Pathar area and Majuli was considered since these areas are having long tradition of cultivating indigenous varieties. Although sixty seven varieties were collected a few varieties were got damaged hence their characteristics could not be cross checked with the samples collected.

Moreover since the farmers do not keep proper farm inventory for many information like yield and durations the investigators had to depend much on their recall memory.

The agronomic characteristics of the varieties collected are given below.

Characterization:

Characterization could not be done for all the varieties for which information sheets were filled since material were not found and facts could not be ascertained. Although the forms were filled up in consultation with farmers certain characteristics like seed shape ,rice colour etc could not be cross checked. 

Sl. No	Name and characteristics of varieties
1.	Ronga Bow: It is a long duration varieties with a crop duration of up to 9 months (270 days). It grows on low lying clay type soils. It is a suitable variety for flood affected areas and can withstand heavy flood and inundation. Average yield is 14 mon per bigha (560kg/bigha). The rice grain is long and yellow. The rice gives a full feeling after eating. The rice cooks slowly with dry separate grain. It is used for a special  Assamese recipe called “handoh guri” which is popular during festivals like Bihu.
2.	Soru Jahinga: Grows well on Medium and low land with sandy to clay type soil. Plant height is medium. Yield per acre is around 1600kg.It cannot tolerate either flood or drought. The grain is yellow and the rice colour is whitish. Rice is slim and cooks easily.
3.	Kon Joha: It grows well on Medium land with clay type soil. Plant height is medium. Crop duration is around 170 days. Grain type is small and yellow. Rice is small and yellowish. Used both as regular meal and special receipes in festivals.
4.	Boga Joha: The variety grows on Medium to low land on Black to sandy soil. Yield goes upto 8 mon per bigha. Maturity period is 4months. Grain colour is yellow and the rice is white. Rice grain is small and finer. Generally used for side dish and the grain are slightly sticky.
5.	Bor Jahingia: Grows on medium to low land. Grows both on sandy to clay type of soil.Crop duration is around 180 days. Plant height is tall. Average yield is around 10-12 mon per bigha. Grain type is long and red. Rice colour is white and medium sized.
6.	Basanti
7.	Ikora Sali: Grows on medium to low land on clay type of soil. Plant height is tall. Crop duration is around 180 days.Average yield is around 15-16 mon per bigha. Grain type is fat and red in colour with having an antenna on the tip of the grain. Rice is white in colour.
8.	Jaboli
9.	Mothong
10.	Ampakhi: Gros on medium land with clay type soil. Crop duration is of five(5) months. Plant height is medium.yield goes up to 15-16 mon per bigha.The variety cannot tolerate flood. The grain is slim and grain colour is whitish. Rice colour isalso white. The grains are dry and separate when cooked.
11.	Monuhor Sali:  Grows on medium land to low land on clay type soil.Crop duration is around 170 days.Plant height inf 16-17 mon per bigha. Grain type is long and yellow. Rice is slim and white. Cooks  slowly.
12.	Jangoni Bora:  It is a long duration variety with crop period of six months. Grows well on medium land. Grows both on sandy to clay type soil. Plant height medium. Yield varies from 8-12 mon per bigha. Grain colour is red and the rice colour is yellowish. It is used especially in ceremonies as sweet items.The grain is fat/round with sticky grains.
13.	Ako Sali: Long duration variety with crop duration of six months. Grows well on Low land. Plant height is tall type. Yield goes up to 10-13 mon per bigha.Rice cooks slowly with dry and separate grains.   The rice grain is yellow and the rice colour is white. The grain type is fat and round.
14.	Kati Sali: It grows on medium to low land. Grows well on black to sandy soil. Plant height is tall type. Crop duration is 150-160days.Yield varies from 10-12 mon per bigha. Grain colour is light yellow and rice is whitish with fine surface. Grain type is small.
15.	Swagmoni Bora: Grows well on medium to low land and on black to sandy soil. Crop duration is around 180 days with medium plant height. Yield is around 10 mon per bigha. The grain colour is brownish yellow and rice colour is whitish. The grain type is long. Rice is sticky when cooked. Used as side items.
16.	Malbhog Sokoua It grows well on up and medium land with sandy soil. Maturity period is 5 months. Average yield is 1120 kg per acre. It cannot tolerate either floods or drought. The straw from this variety is soft. Rice grain is fat and round. Rice cooks easily with sticky rice. The rice is used for special festival and ceremonies as “cheera”.
17.	Kola Bora Grows well on low land with black and sandy soil. Croup duration is around 180 days. Plant height is tall. Yield goes up to 500 kg. per bigha. It cannot tolerate floods or drought.  Grain colour is black. The straw from this variety is soft. Rice cooks quickly with sticky rice.
18.	Kekua Bao: Grow well on low land with black soil near river side. Crop duration is 180-210 days. Plant height is tall Yield goes upto 15 mon/bigha( I mon=40kg, 7.5 bigha =1hectare). Grain is reddish brown and large grain. Rice is red in colour  and takes time to cook.Having spike on the from side of the grain. The variety is flood tolerant.
19.	Bokul Bora: Grows well on medium land with clay type soil. Also seen to be grown on sandy loam soil. Crop duration is around 150-155 days. Plant height is medium. Yield per bigha varies from 8-12 mon. The grain is brownish yellow and long and large grain type. The rice colour is yellowish. The rice cooks quickly with sticky rice.
20.	Neghari Bao:
21.	Makhon Bora:  Grows on medium to low land with black to sandy soil. Crop duration is around 180 days.Plant height is tall type. Yield goes up to 18-20 mon per bigha. Average yield is around 15-16 mon per bigha. The grain type is brownish yellow and the rice colour is reddish. Gets cooked quickly with sticky grains.
22.	Bansi Sali:  Grows well on medium land with sandy to clay type soil. Crop duration is of six months .Plant height is tall.  Yield per bigha varies from 16-20 mon. Grain colour is red  and the rice is yellowish. The grain type is long. Non-sticky when cooked. Cooks quickly.
23.	Cheni Champa: It grows on medium land with sandy to clay soil. The crop duration is of around 150 days. Plkant height is tall type. The average yield is 14-16 mon per bigha. The variety cannot tolerate flood. The grain type is slim and grain colour is whitish and the rice is light yellow.
24.	Joha: Grows on medium land with clay type soil. Crop duration is 155-165 days. Plant height is medium. Average yield is 5-6 mon per bigha. The grain type is slim and colour is black. The rice colour is yellow with smooth surface.having a typical aroma. Mainly used in festivals.
25.	Swag Moni: Grows on medium land with sandy to clay soil. Crop duration is around 150 days. Plant height is medium and average yield is 13-14 mon per bigha. Grain type is fat rounded, and colour is red. Rice colour is white. The rice after cooking is non-sticky.
26.	Gethu:  Grows on medium to low land with black soil and clay soil. Planr height is tall. Crop duration  is 180 days. Average yield is 12-14 mon per bigha. Grain type is fat/ round and yellow in colour. Rice colour is white. Used for regular meals. Rice cooks slowly and  heavy to digest.
27.	Solpona: Grows on medium land with sandy to clay soil. Plant height is medium and crop duration is 180days. Average yield is around 12-13 mon per bigha.Rice grain is white and long  and colour of the rice is red.On cooking dry and separate grains. Used for meals.
28.	Ghew Bora:  Grows on Medium land with clay type of soil. Maturity period is around 160 days. Plant height is tall. Average yield is 7-8 mon per bigha. Grain is long and colour is red. Rice colour is also reddish.
29	Sokoua:  Grows on Medium land with clay soil. Crop duration is 160 days. Plant height is tall. Average yield is 7-8 mon per bigha. Grain is slim and yellow. Rice colour is white. Used especially for sweet items in ceremonies and festivals. Non-sticky rice.
30	Helosi Bora:  Grows on medium land with clay type of soil. Crop duration is 150 days. Plant height is medium. Average yield is 8-10 mon per bigha. Grain type is fat and colour is red. Rice colour is white. Rice is sticky on cooking. Used for special items only , not for regular meal.
31.	Bhug Prasad:  Grows on Medium land and on clay soil. Crop duration is 180 days. Plant height is medium. Average yield is 13-15 mon per bigha. Grain type is slim and white. Rice colour is yellowish. Cooks quickly and non-sticky type.
32.	Noga Sali:Grows on medium  and low land with clay type soil. Maturity period is 5 months. Plant height is medium. Average yield is 1960 kg per acre. It cannot tolerate either flood or drought. The straw from this variety is hard. Grain type is fat and round. Rice cooks quickly and dry, separate grains. It is possible to store this rice for a long period without spoiling.
33.	Kutkuti Sali: Grows on Medium land with sandy to clay type of soil. Crop duration is 160 days. Plant height is tall. Average yield is 17-18 mon per bigha. Grain is fat and rounded yellow in colour. Rice colour is white. On cooking rice is non-sticky. Used for regular meals.
34.	Maloti
35.	Bet Guti: Grows both on Medium and Low land with clay type of soil. Crop duration is 150 days (+/-5). Plant height short type. Grain is fat and rounded and colour is yellow. Rice is slightly reddish. Cooks quickly and and non-sticky.Gives a “full” feeling after eating.
36.	Jahingia:  Grows on medium to low land with sandy to clay type of soil. Crop duration is around 150 days. Plant height is tall. Average yield is 17-18 mon per bigha. Grain type is long and red. Rice is non-sticky type.
37.	Kola guni : Medium to low land and with sandy to clay type soil. Plant height is medium. Average yield is 16-17 mon per bigha. Grain type is small and yellow. Rice colour is typically red and easily identifiable.
38	Miya bao: Grows on medium to low land. Plant height is tall. Average yield is 15-16 mon per bigha. Crop duration is 190-210 days. Grain type is long and yellow in colour. Rice is also long and white.Cooks slowly and heavy to digest.
39.	Na –gayan Sali:Grows well on medium and low land. Plant height is tall. Crop duration is around 180 days. It cannot tolerate floods. The straw from this variety is hard. Grain type is small. Rice have an aroma and cooks slowly. Average yield is 12-14 mon per bigha
40	Mamonsinga bao: Grows on low land with black soil. Crop duration is 180-210 days. Average yield 14-15 mon per bigha. Grain type is flat and brow in clour . Rice is typically red in colour.Cooks slowly and heavy to digest.
41	Fapori bora: Grows on medium land. Maturity period is 5 months. Plant height is medium. Average yield is around 2380 kg per acre. This variety can tolerate flood or drought. The rice have an aroma and grain type is fat and round. This rice is used for special festivals and ceremonies.
42	Laki Sali: It grows well on medium land. Plant height is medium. Average yield is around 2520 kg. per acre. It cannot tolerate floods or drought. The straw from this variety is hard. Grain type is fat and round. Rice cooks slowly. The rice gives a full feeling for long.
43	Kola jaha: It grows well on medium land. Plant height is medium. Average yield is around 2520 kg. per acre. It cannot tolerate floods or drought. The straw from this variety is hard. Grain type is fat and round. Rice cooks slowly. The rice gives a full feeling for long. It is possible to store for a long period without spoiling. Grain is black in colour.
44	Man bora: Grows well on medium land on clay type soil. Maturity period is 6 months. Plant height is tall. Average yield is 8-9 mon per bigha.It cannot tolerate floods or drought. The straw from this variety is soft. Grain type is slim. Rice cooks quickly and sticky grains. Not used as regular meal.
45.	Mugi Sali: Grows on medium land on clay type soil. Maturity period is 5 months. Yield of variety is 1400 kg per acre. The straw from this variety is soft. Grain type is fat and round. Rice cooks quickly and dry, separate grains. On cooked rice remains fresh to long period.
46	Boga maguri: The variety grows on medium and low land on clay type soil. Maturity period is 6 months. Plant height is tall. Average yield is 1680 kg per acre. It cannot tolerate floods or drought. The straw from this variety is soft. Grain type is fat and round. Rice cooks quickly and dry, separate grains. It is possible to store this rice for a long period without spoiling.
47	Amona Bao: On low land and black soil. Also grows on sandy soil. Plant height is tall. Grain type is fat and white. Rice colour is red. Average yield is 15-16 mon per bigha.It takes time for cooking.Gives a “full” feeling after eating.
48	Jili Baw: Grows on low land and black soil. Crop duration is 210 days. Plant height is medium. Average yield is 10-12 mon per bigha. Long white grain with yellowish rice.
49	Biria Bhonga Baw: Grows on low land with black type of soil found near river side. Plant height is tall. Average yield is around 12-15 mon per bigha. Grain type is long and brown and rice is red in colour.Rice cooks slowly  and heavy to eat. Crop duration is 190 to 210 days. Resistant to flood and inundation.
50	Kholihoi Baw:  Grows on low land with black soil near river side.Plant height is tall and crop duration is around 200-210 days. Average yield is around 15-18 mon per bigha.Grain type is fat round having yellow and brown stripe. Rice is red in colour and separate on cooking. Cooks slowly and gives a “full” feeling after eating.
51	Ronga Joha: Grows well on medium and low land with clay type soil. Maturity period is 160 days. Yield goes up to 600 kg. per acre. It cannot tolerate floods or drought. The straw from this variety is soft. Grain type is small. Rice cooks quickly and dry separate grains. It is possible to store this rice for a long period without spoiling.
52	Soru Sokoua:  Grows on medium land and on sandy soil. Crop duration is about 150 days. Plant is tall type. Averge yield is 10-12 mon per bigha. Grain type is fat and having brown and yellow stripes. Rice colour is white.
53	Kola Bora: Grows on low land with black soil. Also grown on sandy soil. Plant type is tall. Crop duration is 180 days.Average yield is around 12 mon per bigha. Grain type is slim and red and the rice is small and yellow. Rice cooks quickly and is sticky type.
54	Rongdoi:  Grows on medium t o low land with black to sandy soil. Crop duration is 160 days.Plant height is tall. Average yield is around 12-13 mon per bigha.Rice grain is small and yellow. Rice is white. Cooks slowly and produce non-sticky rice. Heavy to digest.
55	Doria:  Grows on medium to low land with black and sandy soil.Crop duration is 150 days. Plant height is tall type.Average yield is around 12 mon per bigha.Grain type is slim and yellow rice colour varies from red to white.
56	Sial Najia Bora: Grows on medium land to low land with black to sandy soil. Crop duration is 160 days. Plant height is medium.Average yield is around 12 mon per bigha.
57	Pakhi Bora:  Grows on medium land and on red soil. Crop duration is around 180 days. Plant height is medium. Average yield is around 12 mon per bigha. The grain is peculiar with having a “ wing”  kind of covering around it and hence the name  “pakhi” bora which in Assam se means wing .Grain is fat and rounded and is red in colour . The colour of the “eing” is yellow. Rice is small and white in colour. On cooking produces sticky rice and used only for side receipes not for regular meals.
58	Monipuri: Grows on low land and on clay type soil. Crop duration is 180 days. Plant height is medium. Average yield is around 20 mon per bigha. Grain type is long and yellow. Rice is white and cooks slowly.
59	Adolia:  Grows on medium land and on black soil.Crop duration is of six months. Plant height is medium. Average yield is around 14-15 mon per bigha. Grain type is fat/ round and yellow in colour . Rice is white in colour. Heavy to digest.
60	Ronga solpona:  Grows on medium land with black soil. Plant height is medium. Crop duration 180 days. Average yield is around 15 mon per bigha. Grain type is long and reddish and the rice clour is white.
61	Hatidotuwa: Grows on medium up land with black to sandy soil. Crop duration is of 180 days. Plant height is medium. Average yield is around 10-12 mon per bigha. Grain type is slim and yellow in colour. Rice colour is white. Rice cooks quickly.
62	Haripuwa sakua: Grows on medium land with black soil.Crop duration is around 180 days. Plant height is tall. Average yield is around 15 mon per bigha.Grain type is fat and red in colour. Rice is small and white. Used for traditional items like “komal chawl”, “ sandoh”, “ murhi” etc , used in festivals. Not used  for regular meals.

Conservation strategy:

The varieties are being conserved both in-situ and in gene bank .

A “Community Seed Bank” has been established attached with NECR office at Dergaon.

For in-situ conservation a “Rice Diversity Park” is planned to be established in selected villages in Golaghat district. Twenty to twenty five varieties will be taken in the first year on ten square meter plots.  Some of the agronomic features including that of plant height, penicle length and actual crop duration etc can be actually measured only with replication. The information already gathered can also be cross checked after cultivation.

The “Rice Diversity Park” would be established in association with the rural communities with leased in land. Proper seed selection, screening for any impurity, seed treatment, sowing and transplanting would be done under direct supervision and monitoring under NECR. Qualified manpower would be deputed for the entire crop period. We will seek separate funding for this.

The Indian government has shut the door on NGOs

Deborah Doane

NGOs in India have been accused of serving as tools for the foreign policy interests of western governments

7 September 2016 12.19 BST

It’s been over two years since a leaked report by India’s Intelligence Bureau (IB) sent a chill across Indian civil society. NGOs were accused by the IB of reducing India’s GDP by a staggering 2-3% per annum, by campaigning against projects that the Indian government argued to be integral for economic growth.

The fallout was profound. NGOs, including Greenpeace, Amnesty and Cordaid, were accused of “serving as tools for foreign policy interests of western governments” by sponsoring campaigns to protect the environment or support human rights. “Anti-development” activities included campaigns against climate change, workers’ rights, or even the disposal of e-waste by India’s massive IT sector. The Ford Foundation was also among those named. For a period of time, all the foundation’s funds coming into India were scrutinised by the Indian home ministry.

Accusing development NGOs of being anti-development is somewhat of a paradox – but it’s a growing global trend. “Particularly for those activists who dare to challenge economic and political elites, the environment in which civil society operates has continued to deteriorate,” reported Civicus, the global civil society alliance, in their 2016 State of Civil Society review.

In India, prior to the IB report, there were already constraints and increased scrutiny of NGOs. The Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) was introduced in 2010, requiring all NGOs to apply for a license to receive foreign funding. The act was initially targeted at international political funding, but NGOs were included in its remit.

Before the leaked IB report, some hailed the increased scrutiny as potentially positive: “This is good for India; it will force Indians to be more conscious of the role of NGOs and to take ownership for our issues” said G Ananthapadmanabhan at the time, who had been the CEO of both Amnesty International and Greenpeace in India.

It was a compelling argument: for civil society to thrive it needs local support. And in India, that support is lukewarm, at best. “The civil society sector, especially those that receive foreign funding, doesn’t enjoy societal credibility,” says Biraj Patnaik, a human rights activist. “Indian society is fundamentally xenophobic, and faces a post-colonial hangover.” Patnaik explains that the role of the CIA in regime changes around the world during the 1970s, as well as the perception then that it was meddling in internal affairs in India, has left scars that still hurt forty years after the end of the cold war. 

But the attack on foreign funding of civil society hasn’t resulted in the sudden rise of domestic donations and supporters, and the optimism of those in the NGO world has faded. Instead, the clampdown has seen many organisations simply fold. It’s estimated that at least 10,000 FCRA licenses, needed to receive foreign funds, have been revoked. Some of this is purely administrative – organisations failing to submit the proper paperwork. But it was also tactical on the part of the government: requiring short turnaround times, or digital returns for small organisations presents a huge barrier to organisations lacking capacity.

The environment for constructive engagement with the government has, as a consequence, been severely constrained. Suman Sahai, founder of the Indian Gene Campaign says: “If you want to do campaigning [in India], you need to engage with the government. But the current climate is one of total disengagement. The government has shut the door on the NGO sector.”

Patnaik agrees. “It’s not that the current regime is against all NGOs. But their actions clearly show that they are opposed to all NGOs working on human rights. There is little space for dialogue or negotiation on rights issues with the present government.” Human rights organisations have seen their operations constrained and Sahai worries about the culture of fear that has manifested since the IB report. “Most people are staying below the radar,” she says. “We can’t even get people to sit on our boards. They’re resigning, fearing harassment from the government.”

All NGOs receiving foreign funds now have to re-register for their FCRA license. Organisations with permanent FCRA licenses now have to get these renewed every five years. Most are doing their utmost to comply: “We’re now trying to change tactics. They want reporting? We’ll kill them with transparency,” says one activist.

In India and other countries where civil society is threatened, NGOs need to find new ways to call for change. Some don’t see campaigning approaches, such as Greenpeace’s opposition to coal-fired power stations, or Action Aid’s activism against the mining company Vedanta, as being part of the answer. At the time of the IB report, Greenpeace India faced the brunt of public accusations: shortly after the report was leaked, a Greenpeace staff member was removed from a flight on her way to a meeting in the UK. Two years on, the organisation continues to fight government attempts to shut them down: six court judgments against their ban have ruled the government’s actions as unlawful.

“We need to think of ways of speaking where we can’t be targeted and closed down,” says Jayati Ghosh, from Jawaharlal Nehru University. “We need to persuade people about the validity of what we’re saying, that environment doesn’t have to be a trade-off for development.”

This is a tall order in a country where poverty is so overwhelming. For the vast majority of Indians, thinking long-term about whether climate change can be solved by organic farming and clean energy seems irrelevant when you simply want a roof over your head and some food on the table, or for your children to go to school. 

But it’s unlikely that the trend will reverse, in India or elsewhere. Civil society everywhere is under threat, including in the UK, where charities receiving government funding are now being prevented from using those funds to campaign against government policies, a move which appears to silence the government’s critics. It may not be on the scale of the Indian clampdown, but it’s certainly on the spectrum. 

Protecting the voices of NGOs and activists seems to be one of the biggest challenges facing the development community. Retreating from hard-edged campaigning and failing to challenge government is clearly not the answer. But if challenging governments in developing countries isn’t done while building support from the local community, it risks failing altogether.

Vested interests fuelled Uttarakhand forest fires

Suman Sahai

A few days ago, I sat on the verandah of the Gene Campaign field station in Orakhan in the Kumaon region of Uttarakhand, watching the forests of Mukteshwar burn. It was heart-breaking to see the fire grow and spread and the flames leaping into the sky. On the mountain crest, the flames were shooting up, forming a dreadful corona. We watched helplessly but could not detect any activity to control the fire. Next day, friends who were supposed to come visiting called to say they were dog tired since all of them were up all night, trying to put out the fires that were creeping closer to their homes. The whole village was up, beating back the flames. In the mountains there is a tradition that all village people will rush to help put out forest fires.

The next day, driving down to Kathgodam to get the train, my heart sank as I realised the extent to which the forests were burning. From Mukteshwar to Kathgodam, there were patches of forest going up in smoke, all along the entire route. Somebody described them as “garlands of fire”, draping the hillside. Deadly garlands, yes. At Kathgodam station, the fires had reached almost the base of the low hills. I feared for the safety of the trains and the people.

Later, from newspapers I learnt that the fires had spread over both the Kumaon and Garhwal regions. Our district Nainital in Kumaon, as well as Tehri and Pauri in Garhwal, were apparently the worst affected. The total number of forest fires had gone up to nearly 1,100 before the interventions to control the fire began a few days ago. Once the governor stepped in to have more personnel deployed and New Delhi sent the Air Force (who else but the fauj at a time of crisis!), things began to get under control but not before a lot of damage had been done.

Losing chunks of the Mukteshwar forest has been a big blow. Avid foresters of yesteryears tell us that the Mukteshwar forest is one of the best patches of forest in the western Himalayas. It still is one of the best conserved, full of oak and rhododendron with not so much chir pine.The presence of chir pine in a predominantly oak forest is an indication of degradation. When the broad leafed trees are felled, the pine moves in. Pine trees shed their needle-like leaves copiously from the start of summer and the ground is covered with a carpet of long, resin-rich, acidic pine needles. These are the main culprits of forest fires. Because of their resin, pine needles catch fire quickly. A beedi or match tossed carelessly on the roadside can start a fire claiming entire hill sides. The damage to the gorgeous Mukteshwar forest will be assessed in the coming days but the visuals predict bad news.

After the fires have been put out and the damage assessed, questions must be asked about the capability and preparedness of the forest department. Sure, forest fires happen in summer and some fires are an annual feature but why did it take so long — according to some accounts, weeks and months — before action was taken to control the fires? Why was help not sought earlier, knowing the fragile situation of a very dry, inflammable forest floor? It has not rained since September 2015 and the Himalayan vegetation, especially in pine areas, is like tinder. All the more reason that the forest department and administration should have been on high alert, anticipating more fires than usual.

The distressing fact is that people incharge down the line have displayed callous neglect and let the jungle burn. But there is worse: Stories abound in the villages about complicity and some of these stories have been mentioned in the media. One story is that the people in the forest department set the fires deliberately because they get extra money to put out forest fires.

The other is that there is connivance between people in the forest department and the timber mafia so that forests are set on fire and, ultimately, when all is over, supposedly burnt trees in the affected blocks are auctioned off.

At this time, far more than the “burnt” trees find their way to the timber traders. The third story is about the land mafia being in cahoots with the administration to grab land for commercial purposes. When the forest is burnt down, people suggest the status of the land be changed, it’s not a forest anymore and it can be sold to those who want to build hotels and resorts. Although this time, I think people may have miscalculated the fury of the fire in the brittle dry condition of the forest and the fire ran away with all their evil plans and calculations.

And then there’s a fourth story: That those who deal in pine resin and keep resin stocks in forest depots start fires to claim compensation far in excess of what they had collected and stocked. Who knows what the truth is. Given the crazy levels of corruption in this country, any one or all of these stories could be true.

An open and transparent inquiry should be held on the devastating fires that have destroyed some 3,000 hectares of Uttarakhand’s forests, killing people, animals, birds, insects and other life forms. The biodiversity of the area has been wrecked. The leopard, deer and other wild animals have lost their homes and habitats. The birds have lost their nests with their eggs and baby chicks. The butterflies and moths have been charred and heaven knows how long all this will take to come back, if at all. The perpetrators must be punished severely. Not the village lads but the mafias and those who benefit from such disasters, for these are crimes against future generations.

The writer, chairperson of Gene Campaign, is a scientist and development activist. She can be reached at mail@genecampaign.org

The Asian Age, 11 May 2016

GM Mustard: Repeating Mistakes

Suman Sahai

An alliance of farmers organizations has recently asked the central government not to proceed any further with field trials of GM mustard. They go further and are asking for a stop to the commercialization of GM mustard. The farmer alliance has in addition demanded that the Government of Punjab recommend to the Centre that all trials of GM mustard be halted. Punjab is an important mustard growing state and its farmers do not want GM mustard. So why is the government pushing for its release, moving ahead with its field trials? If the consumers of this technology have reservations and reject the genetically modified mustard, in whose interest is the government pushing it? Increasingly, GM crops are looking less and less like products that farmers want and more and more like something that someone else wants to force them to have.

One thing is clear to anyone who knows the agriculture sector, farmers are not stupid. They know what works for them and what doesn't. They are willing to experiment, accepting and adopting what is suited to their farming and rejecting what doesn't make economic sense. Countering the push for GM crops based on the argument that it is high yielding, farmers in Punjab are pointing out that yield and productivity are not the issue, faulty government policies are the problem. They say that if proper support to crop cultivation and remunerative pricing are enforced as according to the legal framework in place, they should be, then new varieties of mustard are not required.

Safety issues can't be ignored

The commercialization of any GM food crop will of necessity have to demonstrate that it is safe for the environment and not harmful to human and animal health. This will be best achieved by sharing the results of safety testing with the public. But this is exactly what the developers of GM crops refuse to do. Requests for information on biosafety data are turned down citing that such information is ‘confidential business information'.

This is utterly ridiculous. Information about the nature of the gene construct may be classified and the innovation may constitute ‘confidential business information'. But under no circumstances can any information which could have a bearing on public health, be withheld from the public and be termed ‘confidential'. The refusal of technology providers and technology regulators to be transparent and share information with the public has led to a growing distrust of GM technology. With the passage of time even those not greatly involved with the debate on GM crops are asking why the government/ industry is hiding data if the data are clean and there is nothing to fear? The more the technology providers hide data, the greater the likelihood of the public contesting the adoption of GM technology.

Liability has to be fixed

Then there is the issue of fixing liability. In its rush to promote GM crops, government agencies have not cared about bringing in a law on liability and redress. The recent Bt cotton failure reveals what can go wrong with GM technology. In the absence of a national law on liability and redress who is going to be held responsible for the crippling losses incurred by the farmers in Punjab and Haryana ? How will liability be fixed for the failure? Under which law will Monsanto, the owner of Bt technology and the Bt genes and their partner seed companies, be held accountable for the damage caused by the failure of the Bt cotton crop?

Gene Campaign has pointed out repeatedly that adopting the new transformative technologies which scientists acknowledge have potential dangers, without a strong legal framework within which the technology should be considered for adoption, is dangerous. It is irresponsible and unethical to expose farmers and consumers, to new technologies without ensuring that they are adequately protected incase the technology fails. In other countries this has been done by enacting laws governing liability and redress so that when a technology goes wrong, the technology provider is legally liable to make good the losses and clean up the mess.

The StarLink case is a good example of why laws on liability are important for societies wishing to go the GM route. StarLink is a genetically engineered corn hybrid which was cleared in the US as an animal feed but not as human food. In 2000 StarLink corn was detected in processed foods like taco shells. Aventis, the company that owned StarLink had to trace and buy back all the StarLink corn that had contaminated corn stocks in different parts of the US. They also had to cover the cost of cleaning and sanitizing equipment used to process corn from harvesting and cleaning to storage. It is estimated that in 2001, Aventis could have incurred a cost upto $ 1 billion to clean up the StarLink mess.

India continues to have an ad hoc approach to GM crops and those who should know better, have allowed a confrontational situation to develop. This is hardly intelligent. It would be advisable to conduct an honest dialogue about the pros and cons of GM technology and its relevance and use under Indian conditions.

Source: BioSpectrum, 16 January 2016, 

http://www.biospectrumindia.com/biospecindia/views/223162/gm-mustard-repeating-mistakes

Reimagining farming

Suman Sahai

Rather than just being an avenue for food security, let agriculture generate cash surplus

I have just returned from Uttarakhand where Gene Campaign has been working on issues related to agriculture, food and nutrition for the past 14 to 15 years. The aspirations of the younger generation with respect to what they want from life are changing so rapidly that people of the older generation are most often not aware of what their children want. Indeed this is true across the country, especially in rural areas where agriculture remains the mainstay despite a growing disconnect from it. This understanding is not new. Already in 2005, a study conducted by the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) told us that 40 per cent of farmers did not want to continue in farming and would move out of it if they could find another livelihood. Ten years down the line the situation has not improved. It has only worsened. As the agrarian crisis shows no signs of dissipating, farmers are leaving agriculture in droves. In Uttarakhand, entire villages have been abandoned and the fields have not been tilled for several years.

The policy makers and scientists have, however, failed to recognise this alarming trend and have failed to take any remedial steps. Equally, they have failed to synchronise their planning with the aspirations of either the farming community or the young people living in rural areas. Let me start with the dominant narrative in the food and agriculture sector. We are still talking the language of ‘food security’ and ‘nutrition security’. Granted that the latter remains a challenge of serious dimension but in my many conversations with young farmers in Uttarakhand , Jharkhand, UP, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and occasionally in other states as well reveal one common theme. 

Young people want cash income from agriculture, not ‘food security’ per se. So we need to change the focus and the discourse from ‘food security’ to prosperous, well-paying farms. The younger rural youth perceives agriculture as a mug’s game. You will often hear the farmers’ sons say: “Baba, you do the farming. I am off to the city where I will at least get a steady income’. The fact is that farming does not give a steady income and more often than not, rather than an income, the net returns are negative. Why will the young want to continue to suffer like their parents?

In a consumerist society and with the onslaught of television programs and advertisements, most young people do not want to associate with agriculture as it is being practiced. They want better lives and different kinds of things for which they want cash in their pockets.

But their attitude to agriculture can change if agriculture starts generating cash incomes that can buy them the kinds of things they aspire to, a powerful motorcycle, a bigger television set, fashionable clothes and shoes, visits to the city and so on.

So my suggestion is, when government programmes try to promote agriculture, let the focus be rather more on agriculture being an avenue that can generate surplus cash rather than just food security. And change the perception about agriculture. In today’s world, perception is king!!

Start with national TV channels. Stop showing the farmer in a dhoti with a plough upon his shoulder, crushed with misery, with three worry lines furrowing his forehead. Or, looking bleakly up at the sky and waiting for the rains to set in as he sits on a piece of land that is cracked and parched from drought. This is not an image the youth (or anyone else) wants to identify with. Show the farmer as a smart young man or woman taking produce to the market, processing fruit into attractive bottles of juices and jams, operating a unit making parboiled rice and packing it into attractive packages, making dalia out of wheat , chips out of potatoes, sauce out of tomatoes, breakfast cereals out of grain mixtures. Show that agriculture makes money, and is a glamorous profession.

Take a cue from the advertising the defence sector does. When they invite people to join the army, air force or navy, a smart young man in his blue-gray overalls, carrying his helmet under his arm, is shown against the backdrop of a fighter plane. The army is represented by dashing young men in spit and polish, looking ready to take on any enemy to defend the country. A woman in uniform is marching at the Republic Day parade leading a contingent. These are powerful, and attractive images. The air force doesn’t field images of mangled, crashed MiGs, nor does the army pictures of bloodied and assassinated soldiers even though that is sometimes part of their reality.

Why then do we persist in showing a miserable broken farmer, unable to feed his family, crushed by life’s adversities. Adversity is as much part of his life as are mangled planes and sunken ships to the air force and navy. But that is not what the defense sector projects.

In our work with young farmers in Uttarakhand, we have begun to talk about the great possibilities that the farm, orchard and livestock offer to make money and lead good lives. We have started training programmes in value addition of fruits, vegetables and traditional grains like millets and amaranth. We have experts give training and demonstrations in increasing the production and productivity of crops. We also talk to farmers about the importance of healthy, clean produce if they want their products to reach the market. We are introducing the concept of quality standards and the significance of meeting those standards if they want to make their products viable and competitive in the market.

We work principally with women farmers and we have organised them into Mahila Kisan Samitis. Here in Uttarakhand, as in most hill states, the women do most of the farm work. So we figured that they should claim that identity too. We don’t exclude the young men – not those who are interested. They are also included in the value addition work. The response is beginning to show. If you can show make farming and agriculture-related activities prosperous and glamorous enterprises, the younger generation will have a reason to stay on in the profession. Otherwise, they will not.

Daily News and Analysis, 5 January 2016, http://epaper.dnaindia.com/story.aspx?edorsup=Sup&queryed=820009&ed_page=6&boxid=20560&id=85983&eddate=2016-1-5&ed_date=2016-1-5&ed_code=820009&wintype=popup  

Genetically irresponsible

Suman Sahai
 
It is high time that people with divergent views on GM crops sat across the table with representatives of government ministries and MPs to debate which kind of GM technology, if any, would be in the interest of India’s farmers and consumers

Recent developments in the saga of genetically modified (GM) crops have begun to reveal the fault lines of this technology. Not so long ago we had the whitefly attack on the Bt cotton crop in Punjab and Haryana causing devastating losses to farmers. Now we have the chairman of the board of directors at the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) conveying NDDB’s decision not to support the development of GM mustard any further. According to a report by Kumar Sambhav Shrivastava, the NDDB has already spent Rs 50 crore on research for developing GM mustard, but is now withdrawing from the project.

Both the Bt cotton episode and NDDB’s decision on GM mustard illuminate the problems inherent in radical new technologies like genetic engineering. They point out yet again that technology does not exist in a vacuum, that whereas biosafety is a key issue, it remains difficult to resolve. But apart from the vexed issue of biosafety, which is increasingly better understood even if not always complied with, is the demonstration that there are social and economic aspects to such technologies apart from the scientific ones.

The large scale failure of Bt cotton showed us that Bt technology is not what it is made out to be, a panacea for pest control. It is only a limited approach to controlling one pest that is programmed to fail in a country like India where pests are of many different kinds and usually intense in their infestations. Apart from the failure of Bt technology to do what it claims to do, that is control pests, the recent Bt cotton failure reveals another fault line. How will liability be fixed for the failure? Who is going to be held responsible for the massive losses incurred by the farmers in Punjab and Haryana? Under which law will you hold the technology providers, Monsanto in this case and their partner seed companies, liable for the damage caused by a failed technology?

Gene Campaign has been pointing out the need for a national law on liability and redress ever since GM technology became the favourite of government agencies. And scientists in public sector research institutions began to sing in chorus with policymakers who couldn’t wait to make Monsanto happy by aggressively promoting Bt technology. Monsanto owns the Bt gene and anyone who wants to use it has to pay licence fees to Monsanto.

Gene Campaign has also constantly underlined the fact that adopting a radical new technology (which scientists acknowledge has built-in dangers), without a foolproof legal framework within which the technology should be considered for adoption, was foolhardy and dangerous. It is irresponsible and unethical to expose farmers to new technologies without ensuring that they are adequately protected in case the technology fails. Countries do this by enacting laws governing liability and redress. So that when a technology goes wrong, the technology provider is legally liable to make good the losses.

In the case of the NDDB withdrawing support for Deepak Pental’s GM mustard, there is a clear realisation on the part of NDDB that adopting a technology has social and economic implications. Here it is not a case of whether the science is clean or not, it could be either. The question here is whether tagging the GM label is going to benefit NDDB’s product line or hurt it.

The NDDB board probably realised that linking GM mustard with all its controversies to one of their more successful products, cold pressed natural mustard oil, was like shooting themselves in the foot. The NDDB needs GM mustard like it needs a hole in the head. There is sufficient mustard being produced in the country and the NDDB is selling its mustard oil very successfully. Why would it want to hang an albatross around the neck of a product that was flying off the shelves anyway?

What advantage could GM mustard possibly bring the NDDB or the consumer? It would not be cheaper, it would not be more nutritious or have better keeping qualities and it would look the same as the natural mustard oil. On the other hand, “tainted” with the GM label, many consumers were likely to back off, affected by the awareness that GM products could be unsafe. The NDDB gains nothing from getting linked to the GM brand, it could lose a lot.

Owing to the last few years of discussion on the pros and cons of GM technology, and the hotly debated question of the safety of GM foods, there is far greater consumer awareness about the issue now than there was a few years ago. In addition to this, the refusal of technology regulators to be transparent and share information with the public has led to increasing distrust of GM technology and a greater likelihood of the public contesting its adoption.

Against this backdrop, an effective advocacy campaign by activists succeeded in showing the NDDB that supporting research on GM mustard and hence linking it with their popular Dhara brand of mustard oil could put a question mark on the latter’s market acceptance. The NDDB seems to have realised that it made absolutely no sense to martyr the Dhara brand. So it disassociated itself from research on GM mustard and discontinued its support.

For too long policymakers related to agriculture and food have insisted on hearing just one voice, that of the providers of GM technology and the scientists who have blindly pushed for it as the answer to all of India’s agriculture problems. Perhaps activists have sometimes been more shrill than necessary, but they have always attempted to highlight public concerns. It is high time that people with divergent views on GM crops sat across the table with representatives of government ministries and members of Parliament to debate which kind of GM technology, if any, would be in the interest of India’s farmers and consumers.



Asian Age, Dec 10, 2015 http://www.asianage.com/columnists/genetically-irresponsible-982