Human life totally depends on nature and natural resources. Forest and the forest based products are means of subsistence of most rural people in Nepal. Having no alternative options, people are compelled to embrace forest destruction and animal hunting / poaching activities. To feed, school and medicate their children, rural people use to collect firewood and sell them in market and generate money. They are unable to afford electricity, oil-lamp, petroleum gas and agricultural product that is why resources degradation and environment pollution are high in rural areas. Conservation can not be made by keeping rural poor outside from the resources consumption. Conservation is worthless by grabbing the poor people’s life. If we conserve the resources by ignoring the rural people’s need then the saying will not represent “Resources Conservation for the human / live existence”. Therefore, poverty should be reduced first for conservation.
Similarly, In Nepal, to protect the forest and natural resources, government handed over forest to local communities for the conservation and utilization. Government assumed that forest will be conserved after delivering responsibilities to local people. But people did not know how to manage forest and utilize in sustainable way. They used to extract the resources irregularly and unscientifically instead of satisfactory conservation. They used the resources in order to fulfill short term benefit. People were unaware about long term benefit or to set proper vision because they are illiterate and unknown about ecosystem, ecology and nature balance. As the result, we lost many fauna, flora and ecosystem in Nepal. Therefore, illiteracy should be eliminated for the conservation.
PARC therefore believes on “Poverty Reduction and Education; Conservation Adherent” and appeals conservationist and allied agencies to embrace it.
Dear reader, write on these matter whether you agree or disagree or you have more experience regarding this saying, Illiteracy and Poverty; Conservation Adversary”.
Sustainable Conservation Approach cannot be thought from illiterate and unconscious community because they cannot separate, “Wrong and Right”. When people do not have knowledge of conservation opportunities, they never participate in conservation activities, if they participate, that will keep no or less meaning.
To make the active and meaningful participation of people, knowledge/education should be delivered to them otherwise our conservation efforts will be wrathful.
Due to less aware and illiterate, most of rural people in Nepal are practicing destruction based Income Generation Activities. In my opinion, such issue is same to other countries as well. In other hand, children, future dwellers, are deprived from the education which is the foremost threat of conservation. If we wish “Sustainable Conservation or Resource for Future”, educating children will be the first step.
If you, reader, are in the favor or against regarding this topic or you have experience of new ideas, all of you are welcome to make clear or mainstream on this tag “Educate Children; Foster Sustainable Conservation Approach”. (This matter is also published in Discussion Forum of http://www.ruffordsmallgrants.org/rsg/forum/general_discussion)
Rhino Count
Rhinos are going to be counted in Chitwan National Park in this year 2008. Due to habitat loss and poaching, it has been expected that the number of rhino has been reduced.
Please put your guess, How many rhinos (in numbers) will be recorded /counted in this year? Your guess +_ 5 will be rewarded. Close guess will be get first priority. One individual will be rewarded.
