Page 1 of 65
Thai-German Highland Development Programme (TG-HDP)
VOLUME 2
CASE STUDIES OF EXPERIENCE IN IMPLEMENTING
COMMUNITY-BASED LAND USE PLANNING
AND
LOCAL WATERSHED MANAGEMENT (CLM)
AND
SUSTAINABLE FARMING SYSTEMS (SFS)
In Nam Lang Area (Pang Ma Pha District)
and Tam Bon Huai Poo Ling (Muang District) of Mae Hong son Province
(1984-1998)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 List of Abbreviation iii
2 Section 1: Introduction of Case Studies 1
3 Summary of Case Studies Presented in the Volume 2
4 Section 2: CLM Concept, Process, Aims, Objectives and Working Steps 7
5 Section 3: Case Studies
5.1 Case Study of Ban Bor Krai, Pang Ma Pha District 13
5.2 Case Study of Ban Huai Hea, Pang Ma Pha District 33
5.3 Case Study of Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network Organization, Pang Ma Pha District 49
5.4 Case Study of Tambon Tham Lod, Pang Ma Pha District 62
5.5 Case Study of Natural Resource Management in Tambon Huai Poo Ling, Muang 74 District
5.6 Case Study of Ban Huai Hee, Muang District 86
5.7 Case Study of Ban Nam Rin; Changes in Agriculture and Land Use, Tambon Huai Poo 93 Ling
5.8 Case Study of Ban Huai Poo Loei; Changes in Agriculture and Land Use, Tambon Huai 108 Poo Ling
5.9 Case Study of Ban Pang Tong; Introduction of Soil and Water Conservation 124 Programme, Pang Ma Pha District Page 2 of 65
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION TO CASE STUDIES
This collection of case studies forms Volume 2 and accompanies the main document entitled "Review of TG-HDP's Agricultural and Forestry Programmes with Special Reference to Community Based Land Use Planning and Local Watershed Management (CLM)"
Section 2. of this volume presents a brief outline of TG-HDP's agricultural and resource management programmes, concentrating on the CLM concept, process and working steps and which have evolved over the course of the last 8 years.
Section 3. presents 9 individual case studies which are the result of implementation based on the process and working steps described in section 2. These case studies have all be researched and written by technical field staff who have worked with TG-HDP in the Nam Lang and Huai Poo Ling target areas.
The first 6 cases focus on how CLM has actually been implemented at village, inter-village network and tambon (sub-district) levels. Although the CLM programme was initiated on a test run basis in 1989, the most interesting developments have occurred since 1994 when CLM was expanded to include all 26 target villages in Nam Lang and Huai Poo Ling areas. Subsequently, as the project has approached its completion in 1998, several changes have occurred which have broadened the focus of community based natural resource management. In particular, de-centralisation of administrative responsibility within Thai government system to Tambon level has led to the newly established Tambon Administrative Organisations (TAO S ) starting to pay attention to resource management issues. Secondly, the general capacity and confidence of community leadership has been enhanced over the past years of interaction with the project. One outcome has been the establishment of inter-village networks by the community leaders themselves.
The role of TG-HDP staff in dealing with these recent developments has involved a gradual change from initiator to facilitator as local people's organisations have increasingly been taking their own initiatives. The first 4 case studies are drawn from Pang Ma Pha district, Mae Hong Son province, which is located adjacent to the border with Burma and has a mixed population comprising Lahu, Lisu, Shan, Karen and Hmong ethnic minorities. The studies detail the experiences of resource management in 2 particular villages since 1995 and describe the emergence of an inter-village network and the involvement of a TAO in this issue.
Two further case studies describe the situation in Tambon Huai Poo Ling, Muang district, Mae Hong Son province, an area which is ethnically homogenous as all its inhabitants belong to the Karen minority. One case study deals with the area as a whole and describes the conservation nature of the traditional Karen resource management system, whilst the second case focuses on one particular village.
The seventh and eighth case studies were prepared in 1996. They review the contrasting agricultural production systems and changes that have taken place in 2 villages, 1 in Pang Ma Pha and the other in Huai Poo Ling. The final case is an article prepared in late 1997 for inclusion in a book entitled "Using Incentives in Soil Conservation" which is to be published by the World Association of Soil and Water Conservation (WASWC) in 1998.
Summary of case studies presented in this volume
1. Ban Bor Krai, Pang Ma Pha district
Ban Bor Krai is a village inhabited by the black Lahu ethnic minority. It was established in its present location by households moving from a neighbouring village some 20 years ago. The village is situated within the Pai wildlife sanctuary and has limited land which is suitable for agriculture. Since its establishment, the villagers have had to cope with supervision by officials from the wildlife sanctuary and more recently with the suppression of opium cultivation find alternative sources of income. The village is located close to the main Chiang Mai - Mae Hong Son highway.
CLM was introduced in 1995 and the village rapidly proceeded to assess its resource use situation and develop long term land use plans encompassing watershed catchment area, community forest, multi-purpose forest, product collection, agricultural, fruit tree and grazing areas. Several resource improvement activities such as tree planting, fencing and improving grazing areas, establishing rules and regulations for forest product use and establishing soil and water conservation measures have been undertaken. This community was part of an initial network of 3 villages which joined together to manage the collection and sale of bamboo shoots. Its leaders have been instrumental in the formation of the Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network Organisation.
2. Ban Huai Hea, Pang; Ma Pha district
The people of Ban Huai Hea also belong to the black Lahu ethnic minority. The village is located in national forest reserve on the border with Burma to its north. The area around the present village was originally settled some 50 years ago by families Page 3 of 65
from Chiang Mai province and neighbouring Burma in the search of fertile land on which to grow opium. The villagers have traditionally cleared forest in fertile areas, and exercised little management or control over their natural resources.
Land use and potential assessment carried out as part of the CLM process identified the fact that there was an area of 400- 500 rais with the potential to be developed for irrigated paddy rice production. This was particularly important as the villagers were under increasing pressure to cease cultivating rice and opium across the border in Burma. The process also highlighted that the village water supply was being reduced as a result of farmers cultivating in the water catchment area. Land use planning involved development of the potential paddy land, enclosing and replanting the watershed catchment area, the development of a communal grazing area for livestock, the establishment of fruit tree orchards and the expansion of soil and water conservation measures. The implementation of activities is described as is the resolutions of land use disputes with neighbouring villages.
3. The Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network Organisation
This network organisation was only established in its present form during 1997. It has 4 sections comprising natural resource and environment, drug prevention and control, education and dormitory, and cultural and traditions. The natural resource and environment section has its roots in the establishment of a forum between 3 neighbouring villages involved in the harvested and sale of bamboo shoots. Rules and regulations were established and monthly meetings were held, rotating the location between villages. The news of this forum began to spread to the leaders of other neighbouring communities who expressed their desire to also participate as members. As the membership increased, initially from 3 to 6 villages, so also did the scope of resource management issue being considered. Other problems such as land use conflicts, forest encroachment in watershed catchments and livestock grazing over village boundaries were also raised.
As the network grew its efficiency to deal with particular issues declined. A more formal working committee therefore had to be established to improve efficiency and coordinate the TAO and agencies at district level. The overall network now encompasses 20 villages and it has already become involved in many activities including, village boundary definition, forest fire prevention, tree planting in water catchment areas, monitoring of forest cover in catchments, solving inter-village land conflicts, establishing NRM rules and regulations in Tambon Pang Ma Pha and developing an action plan to resolve land use conflicts, improve resource management in a number of villages and conduct regular forums during 1998.
4. Tambon Tham Lod, Pang Ma Pha district
Tambon Tham Lod comprises 7 official and 2 satellite villages. The population includes red Lahu, Shan and Karen ethnic minorities. Three of the villages were established more than 100 years ago, whilst the others have been in their present locations for only 15 or so years. Areas belonging to the Pai wildlife sanctuary, Tham Lod forest park and national forest reserve are all found in the tambon. Much of the land use has been characterised by shifting cultivation, illegal logging, timber cutting and commercial trading of forest products such as tree bark.
Tambon Tham Lod had never previously played a role in natural resource management. TG HDP responded to the de- centralisation policy of the national government by focusing increasing attention to strengthening capacities at the tambon level during the final years of the project. A working process was agreed and initiated. This included the assessment of tambon capabilities, establishment of a development plan, implementation of activities and review and summary of the process. A tambon 3-dimensional model was constructed, village boundaries identified, village level NRM rules and regulations were considered and integrated to form tambon level regulations and NRM conditions of each village was assessed and ranked to assist the tambon to plan and allocate future support accordingly.
5. Natural Resource Management in Tambon Huai Poo Ling, Muang District
Tambon Huai Poo Ling comprises steep mountainous slopes and is generally considered to contain the largest and most fertile areas of largely undisturbed forest in Mae Hong Son province. Although access to the area is difficult, especially during the wet season, a new road is being constructed. The population of some 3,700 persons all belong to the Karen ethnic minority and live in 11 official and 22 satellite villages. The agricultural production system is based on irrigated paddy and upland rice production. Upland rice is grown with associated crops in a long fallow rotation system with one year of cropping followed by 8-10 years of fallow. Other cash crops, taro, red kidney bean, garlic and ginger have recently been introduced in villages with better access. Livestock raising is also an important aspect of the overall production system.
The Karen people have traditional rules and regulations for maintaining and conserving land resources such as watershed catchments, conservation forests and fallow fields due to their strong reliance on the forests as a source of food, herbs and wood for construction. The main causes of concern for the people of Huai Poo Ling relate to outside influences, in particular, misunderstanding of their traditional practices by government officials and encroachment for illegal logging and the extraction of other forest products.
TG-HDP first introduced its CLM programme into one village in 1991. Expansion subsequently occurred to encompass 12 villages in 4 groups. Specific strategies and guidelines were agreed upon and each group identified activities that they planned to carry out as a network. These activities included, protection of water catchments, forest fire protection, conservation of wildlife, establishment of regulations for forest product collection, demarcation of land use boundaries, tree planting, meetings and study tours. Cooperation from various resource persons and implementing agencies was achieved and it is concluded that there has been a considerable development of skills and knowledge among leaders and other members of Huai Poo Ling communities.
6. Ban Huai Hee, Huai Poo Ling District Page 4 of 65
Ban Huai Hee is situated in the western part of Tambon Huai Poo Ling and is the first village that is reached on the newly constructed road. It was settled in its present location 20 years and now consists of 22 households. Subsistence agriculture is based on upland rice grown with various vegetables in a long fallow rotation. Ban Huai Hee has no irrigated paddy fields. Rice production varies from year to year depending on climatic conditions. Cattle, buffalo and goats are kept mainly for sale, while pigs, chickens and ducks are raised for home consumption.
The Karen community clearly identifies and classifies land resources into categories such as conservation forest, multipurpose forest and production areas with traditional rules and regulations applying to each. Based on the philosophy that "people can exist in the forest in a sustainable way', several activities have been carried out. These include, study tours for community leaders, construction of a 3-dimensional model, meetings to exchange experiences, land use planning and the review and adjustment of existing NRM rules and regulations. One important outcome for the villages is that they are now better able to explain their resource management system to outsiders, In particular government officials.
7. Changes in Agriculture and Land Use: Ban Nam Rin, Pang Ma Pha District
Ban Nam Rin, a Lisu village which is located adjacent to the main Chiang Mai - Mae Hong Son highway, was originally settled in 1963. There are some 62 households grouped within strong clan affiliations. The 2 main clans have for many years been contesting for the headman position. Even though community lands are situated within the Pai Wildlife Sanctuary, there are considered to be 2 types of land tenureship, namely, community land watershed and natural forest and individual land - cultivated and fallow. Some 6 households own irrigated paddy land.
Rice, maize and opium were the traditional crops. Opium cultivation ceased in 1989 following concentrated eradication measures but rice and maize continue to be grown, although on smaller areas than in the past. Several cash crops have been introduced, some of which. such as green bean, are grown on contract. As a result of the intensification of crop production, the villages have stopped raising cattle and greatly reduced the number of pigs kept. Farmers devote more time to agriculture than in the past and are increasingly using chemical pesticides, herbicides and fertiliser to maintain crop yields. Credit is available from various village revolving funds and the Bank of Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives.
Off-farm income from younger people working away in factories, local wage labour and handicraft production by women's groups has become more significant for many households than income generated from agriculture. Overall, however, incomes over the last few years have increased considerably. This coincides with a shift to an intensified agricultural system that is more dependent on the marketing of cash crops. This system is less stable than in the past and means that many households have to buy some rice to meet their consumption needs. Forests have regenerated as a result of this intensification, but the impact on soil quality is likely to be negative in the long term.
8. Changes in Agriculture and Land Use: Ban Huai Poo Loei, Tambon Huai Poo Ling
Ban Huai Poo Loei is a Karen village situated in the south-western part of Tambon Huai Poo Ling. The village was first settled some 100 years ago and has gradually expanded to its present size of 44 households. Ban Huai Poo Loei gained official key villages status only in 1995. Christianity, and with it development activities such as medicine and rice banks, was introduced some 30 years ago. More recently the TG-HDP and associated government agencies have supported a range of activities and learning experiences.
Most households have irrigated paddy rice fields, whilst the number growing upland rice has declined. However, the upland rice fields grown in a long fallow rotation are still an important source of vegetables. Taro was introduced in 1988 and most farmers have developed permanent cropping areas. Garlic and other vegetables have been grown in small plots to gain experience for larger scale production when road access is further improved. Improved fruit tree varieties have also been introduced for planting and grafting.
Land use practices have built upon the traditional Karen conservation system. Permanent cropping areas (with and without irrigation) have been established, paddy rice production expanded, livestock grazing areas set aside and improved, and watershed catchments protected and replanted. A comparison with 1990 shows that rice production has increased, as has income from cash crops and off-farm sources (mainly working outside the village).
Change, due to outside influences, has started to have its impact on Ban Huai Poo Loei, although at a slower pace than in many other highland villages in northern Thailand.
9. Introduction of a Soil and Water Conservation Programme in Ban Pang Tong. Pang Ma Pha District
National concerns for environmental degradation in the highlands of northern Thailand led to the Thai-German Highland Development Programme (TG-HDP) promoting a technical package of soil and water conservation (SWC) measures from 1987-1990. Free inputs were provided and cash incentives were paid to farmers, into a village fund and to extension workers based on the level of adoption of technical components. Facilitation in gaining citizenship, identity cards and eventually land use rights for the ethnic minority communities concerned were also used as incentives to adoption. Following the active promotion phase, a sustainable farming systems (SFS) approach continued to support the implementation of SWC measures with free inputs and village wide competitions. Pang Tong, a relatively remotely located village, has since the beginning of the programme had a high SWC adoption rate. Discussion with farmers indicate that the main reason for adopting SWC measures, particularly the vegetative buffer strips, is to clearly mark permanent agricultural plots to reduce the possibility of the Royal Forest Department carrying out reforestation. The free inputs and cash incentives had also been very instrumental in initially encouraging farmers undertake the risk of changing their swidden production system and adopt SWC measures. The location of an extension unit near the village also had a substantial positive influence. Following almost 10 years of using SWC measures, the farmers are now quite convinced of their value in reducing soil erosion. However, increased weed and Page 5 of 65
pest problems, especially when growing upland rice, have resulted in farmers modifying the original technical recommendations.
SECTION 2
CLM CONCEPT, PROCESS, AIMS, OBJECTIVES AND WORKING STEPS
TG-HDP has implemented the CLM programme since 1990, initially starting in 4 test run villages and later expanding to 28 villages; 15 villages in NL and 13 villages in HPL areas. The implementation of CLM was based on a concept, process and working steps which will be described in more detail later.
However, prior to the implementation of CLM concept, the following 2 other concepts related to the agriculture development of the village were also promoted by TG-HDP
1. Concept on Soil and Water Conservation (SWC) (between 1987-1989) This concept emphasised the management of land and soil conservation measures in demonstration plots by planting grass strips to prevent erosion of soil surface. Extension method followed the package extension approach and top down approach. Many villagers had participated in the programme which cover all target villages in NL and main responsible agencies for implementation were the Mae Hong Son Land Development Office, Mae Hong Son Development and Welfare Centre and the Agricultural District Office.
2. Concept on the Development of Sustainable Farming System (SFS) which was considered by the TG-HDP in 1990 to replace SWC since the latter was basically and solely aimed to prevent soil erosion. This concept promoted sustainable farming system (SFS) with the following objectives:
To solve the technical problems of the farmers in relation to the increase in the biodiversity of their plant and animal productions To increase the capability of the villagers for future self-reliance To provide alternatives for the development of highland agriculture systems and to improve the flexibility of the SWC highland measures To improve the coordination among related working agencies and the promotion of participatory agricultural extension approach and increase in efficient services.
CLM Concept
The CLM concept is based on a participatory development approach which involves both the local inhabitants and development agencies. The guiding principles of the concept are that the conservation of natural resources in the highlands can only be achieved if:
the inhabitants of these areas have a sense of permanency and belonging and are able to contribute their ideas to an overall development process which integrates agricultural practices with social activities and emphasises people's participation and self-reliance their right to use natural resources in their community in a sustainable manner is accepted by society they have sufficient land from which to make a living and continue to improve their socio-economic situation in relation to the overall development of the country the issuance of legally accepted land use rights is a long term national objective resource management planning is based on the characteristics and potentials of the land water and forests destructive resource management practices are progressive phased out and replaced by efficient and sustainable methods.
If these principles are followed, it is believed, and has been shown, that highland villagers will cease to encroach into forest areas and take measures to conserve community resources.
A number of considerations relate directly to these guiding principles. These include:
the community has an important role to play in resource (land, water, forest) management as it is located closest to these resources when a community accepts the responsibility to manage local resources, it needs to clearly understand the purpose of each designated area and its proper conservation and utilisation for the benefit of community members development agencies should support local communities in terms of exchange of knowledge and ideas to solve problems and identify appropriate alternatives and solutions. They should also improve the understanding of community leaders in relation to pertinent laws and assist the community to develop appropriate rules and regulations networking and increased cooperation between neighbouring villages and tambons has the potential to improve the achievement of successful resource management.
The CLM Process as a whole attempts to contribute to an appropriate elaboration of the legal and institutional aspects of highland development related to natural resource management. It tries to strengthen the capacities of communities to manage their affairs and establish trustful relationships between villagers and government officials based on participatory working Page 6 of 65
principles with regard to land use planning and resource management.
CLM Aims and Objectives
The overall objectives of the CLM process are stated as expected outcomes of the process in relation to natural resource management. They are now defined as:
1. Improved sustainable use of land, water and forests for the benefit of the community, the local area, the region and the nation as a whole. 2. Rehabilitated watershed catchment areas. 3. Intensified agricultural production on suitable land.
The specific objectives or outputs of the CLM process relate directly to the means by which the overall objectives are attained. These are identified as:
Increased mutual understanding of all stakeholders with regard to the present land use system, its constraints and potentials. Increased awareness of on-going degradation processes and the need to improve the management and conservation of the limited resources. Increased discussion of land use problems and possible solutions. Increased support to communities and their members to improve their skills in land use planning and the monitoring of changes made to resource management practices Reduced conflict over land use and increased ability to solve disputes. Clearer understanding between communities and government officers on land use within designated areas (especially forest reserves and wildlife sanctuaries). Improved cooperation between government agencies. Improved capacities on the part of local organisations to sustainably manage their natural resources. Consolidated indigenous knowledge of resource management amongst community members. Improved legal situation for highland people with regard to land security, land tenure or land ownership.
The CLM process is now considered to broadly follow 6 working steps as shown in Figure 1. The working steps describe the introduction of the CLM process into a new area. It should be emphasised that there is no distinct separation between the steps and that people's organisations in different communities and tambons mobilise, adapt and involve themselves in resource management from various starting points. In fact, it has been found during the last year or so that communities not previously involved have learned from the experiences of their neighbours who have been involved with TG-HDP for several years (see Bor Krai case study). This is especially the case with the expanded Hilltribe Peoples Network in Pang Ma Pha district (see case study of Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network Organization) where some communities have become involved in the network first and only subsequently embarked on the process of village level land use identification and planning. The same is also true for some villages in Tambon Tham Lod (see case study)
CLM Working Steps
1. Concept preparation and establishment of coordination with concerned agencies:
conduct preparatory meetings with the concerned responsible implementing agencies (RIAs) to clarify the CLM concept and approach with regard to methodology, skills, knowledge and application of a participatory working approach. Study tours to sites with effective community based resource management are particularly effective. Specific training, for example on the construction of a 3 dimensional topographic model may also be given select target areas, introduce the CLM concept and approach and reach an understanding with each community on how to proceed.
2. Monitor and assess present land use and community management of their natural resources:
carry out a study of the community using methodologies and tools such as Rural Systems Analysis (RSA), Participatory Rural Analysis (PRA), community land resource mapping and use of a 3-dimensional topographic model identify community groups and leaders who are particularly involved in NRM analyse the potentials, limitations, problems and conflicts concerning NRM in the community participate in regular monthly village meetings to facilitate and monitor the process of consideration of NRM issues raise awareness amongst community leaders through study tours to other villages already practicing effective NRM.
3. Plan land use and natural resource management with the responsible community organisation:
analyse and classify present land uses and identify the boundaries for each land use category (focus group discussions, 3-D model) gather indigenous NRM knowledge in terms of beliefs, rules and regulations establish land use plans (short and longer term) for agriculture, livestock and watershed catchment protection according to the basic needs and critical impacts on the community identify and prioritize development activities to support the land use plans strengthen the capacity of the responsible village organisations as the key mechanism by which NRM will be effected.
4. Implementation of development activities to improve natural resource management and the establishment of linkages with Page 7 of 65
neighbouring communities:
coordinate with responsible implementing agencies (RIAs) to obtain support for the implementation of activities to improve NRM implement activities according to agreed plans monitor changes to land use and provide training in individual plot land use mapping establish forums for regular meetings with neighbouring villages, paying particular attention to: land boundary confirmation conflict resolution joint monitoring of resource utilisation modify/update rules and regulations of forest fire control
5. Strengthening of responsible community organisations and inter-village networks:
joint planning of NRM between villages establishment of a formal network administrative and management structure coordination by the network with local administrative bodies, in particular the Tambon Administrative Organisation (TAO), which has legal responsibilities to safeguard natural resources in the sub-district coordinate with responsible agencies at district and provincial levels facilitate the holding of inter-village network forums to exchange experiences.
6. Dissemination of experiences to other areas and contribute towards the development of appropriate policies:
spread the CLM experiences to community organisations and agencies in other districts, provinces and regions (by hosting study tours, conducting workshops, providing training) identify means by which these experiences can be included in the process of policy development (in workshops, attending meetings, demonstrating with maps and GIS).
SECTION 3: CASE STUDIES
"Community-Based Land Use Planning and Natural Resource Management"
A Case Study of Ban Bor Krai, Moo 11, Tambon Pang Ma Pha,
Pang Ma Pha District, Mae Hong Son Province
by Prasong Jantakad
I. Background
Ban Bor Krai, a village inhabited by people of the Black Lahu ethnic minority, is located in Moo 11, Tambon Pang Ma Pha, Pang Ma Pha district, Mae Hong Son province. It has a population of 160 people 779 male and 81 female) and consists of 31 household families. 29 families belong to the Buddhist religion whilst the other 2 families are of the Christian faith. Ban Bor Krai village is located within the Pai wildlife sanctuary area, is some 800 meters far from the main Pai-Mae Hong Son road and approximately 10 kilometers from the administrative center of Pang Ma Pha district.
Ban Bor Krai is located in the western part of the Pang Ma Pha district, with boundaries with the following villages:
North Ban Mae Lana and Ban Ya Pa Nae
South Ban Rai
East Ban Sam Lang and Ban Tham Lod
West Ban Ja Bo and Ban Luk Kao Lam
1. Village settlement
The villagers of Ban Bor Krai originally migrated from the neighbouring village of Ban Ja Bo in 1978 led by Mr. Ja-ue. The migration started with only the four families of Mr. Ja-ue, Mr. Prasong, Mr. Wirawut and Mr. Udom. The main reason for their migration to Ban Bor Krai was to find a new place to cultivate crops and to raise animals as the rapid increase in the population of Ban Ja Bo had limited the availability of the existing land resource. Ban Bor Krai is situated on top of a mountain ridge with the sides forming a well-like valley. In 1996, it was officially recognized by the Department of Local Administration Page 8 of 65
(Ministry of Interior) as the 11th key village of Tambon Pang Ma Pha, Pang Ma Pha district with Mr. Sompong Phantsammok (Ja-ue) as the village headman.
The village administration consists of two kinds of community leadership; the formal leadership of the village committee; and informal leadership (or traditional leadership) involving the heads of different groups and senior citizens. Even though these two groups have their own distinct roles but their actions are quite well integrated.
2. Production system
Previously, the villagers of Ban Bor Krai practiced shifting agriculture and produced subsistence crops, upland rice for consumption and maize intended for animal raising. Opium production served as the villager's main source of income. Animals have been raised in a free range system with no permanent housing or grazing areas. In effect, animals were left alone to scavenge for their own food in the forest or anywhere else in the village. The villagers have 200 cattle, and almost 400 pigs. Most of the areas cultivated have been on sloping or hilly lands or in the valley (between the two limestone mountains). At present, the main source of income of the village is derived from selling cattle and pigs. Every household also raises pigs for spiritual reasons with each household consuming at least 4 pigs annually during various festivals. Crop production, which is based on rice cultivation, is mainly reliant on rainfed. 5 families grow paddy (irrigated) rice in another village (Ban Rai). Otherwise, several families have planted fruit trees (mango, jackfruit, tamarind, etc.) in their backyard garden for home consumption.
3. Situation of the natural resources
The geology of Ban Bor Krai, which is mainly comprised of limestones outcrops, limits the range of natural resources found within the community's boundaries. Much of the crop production is carried out on sloping land and scattered flatter land pockets found within the valleys and hillsides surrounding the village.
Some villagers still have land in Ban Ja Bo, the village they originally came from. However, most of the cultivated land in Ban Bor Krai is located in the northern part where the main watershed area is found. Until recently, there has been little to no control of the utilization of the natural resources by the villagers themselves; they essentially did whatever they wanted to do since there were no agreed rules and regulations for them to follow. Consequently, the villagers did not have a deep sense of awareness concerning resource conservation. As mentioned earlier, Ban Bor Krai is located in the Pai wildlife sanctuary area where in theory the conservation laws should he very strictly enforced. In practice, however, the villagers were either blamed for habitat destruction by the enforcement officers of the Royal Forestry Department (RFD) from the wildlife sanctuary, or were left to their own devices due to infrequent patrolling of the area. As a result, the understanding of the villagers concerning wildlife sanctuary regulations was poor and they were often arrested. At that time, the villagers believed that the forest was owned by the RFD as represented by their officers and so they had no real interest in participating in forest management. This was the main reason why the limited forest resources had been rapidly deteriorating. Apart from the use of the forest by the villagers of Ban Bor Krai, outsiders and people from other villages also contributed to the resource degradation. Forest utilization became so severe and intensive, particularly in terms of the collection of forest products, such as bamboo shoots, mushrooms and various types of vegetables. Some commercial sales of forest products had begun, whilst traditional collection of forest products was often wasteful, with excess above consumptions needs being fed to animals. There were also some on going conflicts amongst community members and between Ban Bor Krai and its neighboring villages regarding the use of natural resources. Since the area suitable for agricultural purposes was limited, it was very hard for the villagers to expand their production. This constitutes the main reason why the villagers have had to change their production system from shifting agriculture to rotational farming. Each household now has 5-6 plots of land and rotates crop production between the plots.
4. Previous TG-HDP involvement in Ban Bor Krai
The women's group development programme was introduced into several villages in Pang Ma Pha district, including Ban Bor Krai, during 1990 and continued as a separate programme until 1994. Activities were jointly developed between women's group members and TG-HDP staff belonging to the Women's Action Team (WAT). The objectives of the programme were:
to increase the capabilities of women leaders to create confidence amongst group members to enable them to more fully demonstrate their abilities and contribute to the overall development of the community to stimulate and provide opportunities for group members to discuss common issues and assist each other to promote group implementation of activities.
The main activities of the Ban Bor Krai group were handicraft production and pig raising.
II. Problem-Solving Process Through Community Based Land Use Planning and Natural Resource Management
1. Villagers' experience
As already mentioned, the villagers of Ban Bor Krai originally came from Ban Ja Bo and have now established their village for 20 years. During the past years, the villagers did not acquire any experience of land use planning, except for a few villagers who practiced soil and water conservation as a result of their participation in the TG HDP SWC programme. Management of forest resources had largely been implemented by wildlife sanctuary forestry officers (RFD), whose policy did not provide the opportunity for people's participation in natural resource management. This also relates to the legal situation that people Page 9 of 65
should not be allowed to reside in the boundaries of the wildlife sanctuary area. Therefore, their location within the wildlife sanctuary mean that the villagers were subject to RFD supervision and control in occupying a limited area under certain conditions. In effect, villages like Bor Krai have been living under the pressure imposed by forestry laws. One positive benefit of this situation, however, has been the opportunity for some community leaders to participate in several training courses related to the conservation of natural resources, such as forest fire prevention and forest laws, which have been organised and managed by the district forestry office.
2. Land use planning and natural resource management by community organizations
The field trial and testing of community based land use planning and local watershed management (CLM) began in 1989 and included 6 villages in the Nam Lang watershed area, namely, Ban Nam Rin (Lisu), Ban Luk Khao Lam (Black Lahu), Ban Pang Tong (Red Lahu), Ban Pang Kham Noi (Black Lahu), Ban Pha Charoen (Red Lahu) and Ban Ya Pa Nae (Red Lahu). Ban Bor Krai was included as a target village when the programme expanded in 1994 and followed the working steps and process as outlined in the Section 2, of this volume.
Concept preparation was common to all the new target villages and consisted of a 5 day training and study trip to the former Sam Meun project area for village leaders, RFD, other agency and project field staff, which concluded in a general agreement to participate in the CLM programme.
Monitoring and assessment of community land use was conducted by project field staff as part of the Rural Systems Analysis (RSA) which was the methodology used during 1995 to study each target community. At this stage, the 3 dimensional model was introduced as a tool to facilitate the collection of information related to community level land use and natural resource management. The model for Ban Bor Krai was actually constructed during a training on 3-model making and subsequently taken to the village so that land use information could be marked and discussed.
Detailed information on community land use was collected, including the nature of land use by each farmer, the location of plots for rice and maize production, multi-purpose forest sites, the exact locations used by villagers for collecting forest products, new fruit tree orchards, the specific areas where livestock were raised and other related resource uses. The information was transferred to the village 3 dimensional model. Coloured paper and paint was used to indicate the various sites and types of resource utilization. However, this information could not be fully considered until all of the sites indicated on the model had been actually visited and personal assessments carried out.
The monitoring and assessment of community land use in Ban Bor Krai yielded the following observations:
1. Areas planted to fruit trees were usually found surrounding the village or in backyard areas. Utilization of fruits was assessed to be minimal. 2. Areas where soil and water conservation measures (SWC) had been introduced were found in Kiw Jong and in areas nearby the residential zone. 3. Cropping areas were mainly located in the northern and north-eastern sections of the village and were found to be widely scattered along the watershed area. These plots were all located in rainfed areas with medium soil fertility. 4. Ban Bor Krai was found to have only limited areas suitable for cultivation since it is mostly situated amongst limestone mountains.
The results of the community study using the RSA methodology showed that there was no existing village organization in Ban Bor Krai which could take responsibility for the management or maintenance of the community's natural resources.
Although there was a village committee, it did not exercise any actual control or management of the resource situation. The study found that most household had 3-4 plots on which they practiced rotational farming, 5 villagers had their own paddy fields, but these are located in Ban Rai, (Tambon Sobpong, Pang Ma Pha district). Furthermore, the study showed that the villagers collected very extensive and varied types of forest products which they used for both household consumption and sale as a source of income. These products included bamboo shoots, mushrooms and native vegetables many of which were being sold from small roadside stalls located on the main road near the entrance to the village. The revenue from the sale of these forest products alone was considered to provide an income for the villagers of more than 200,000 Baht per year (IP 190) (2). During the collection of these products, there was no consideration of any rules or regulations. It was simply expected that in the future, the villagers would have to walk further and deeper into the forest to collect these products. In short, collection was becoming more and more intensive. The villagers were giving no consideration to the fact that these important products could be over-exploited and disappear one day. They simply believed that despite their removal, natural regeneration would continue to maintain these products somewhere in the forest. Incidentally, information collected indicated that both men and women collected these forest products, most often together, even though the women were usually responsible for sales from the roadside stalls.
3. Planning for community land use
After the actual situation of land use and natural resource management have been studied, the resulting information was discussed with the community through a feed back process. This enabled the villagers to overview the entire situation of their community. The information was discussed and analysed during the course of a general village meeting. The problems and potentials in using forest resources were considered. In particular, the study found that there were limited areas for the villagers to cultivate and that most of the farmers' plots were dependent on rainfall. Some locations were considered to have potential for development as permanent farm land or for intensive agriculture. However, this would involve high investments where irrigation would be involved, considerably more than the capacity of the community or the project to support. It was therefore agreed that all villagers should fully cooperate in the process of land use planning based on the suitability and basic potential of the existing natural resources found within the community land area. On this basis, community leaders submitted a Page 10 of 65
proposal to the government agencies and the tambon council/tambon administrative organization (TAO) requesting financial support to improve the existing land resources for intensive agriculture. To date, the villagers have yet to receive a positive response.
Nevertheless, the community greatly increased its awareness of the need to manage community resources and its members agreed that there was a real need to seriously consider and plan resource allocation for both short- and long-term land use. The main target for long-term land use planning was to intensity agricultural production on suitable land, identify areas suitable for fruit tree production and attain long term benefits accordingly.
After analyzing the problems and potentials of the land resources in the community, the different categories of land were then clearly identified in order to conveniently facilitate detailed land use planning. As a result, three (3) categories were identified:
1. Residential area 2. Agriculture areas 3. Community forest
Subsequently, detailed planning of the appropriate use of resources in each of these areas was initiated.
1. Residential area
This consists of areas where residential houses are constructed, including the school area and other storage areas. The total area is about 40 rai.
2. Agriculture areas
This land category is considered by the villagers to be the most important because when cultivated with crops, it provides food for household members. However, in order for these areas to be used sustainably in the longer term, the appropriateness for specific purposes required more detailed analysis. In total, agricultural areas covered about 3,550 rai, classified into the following sub-categories:
areas for raising livestock areas for planting fruit trees and other perennials areas for growing upland rice, annual crops or other cash crops
Areas for raising livestock
These areas was also considered quite important by the villagers of Ban Bor Krai because a large part of their income derived from the sales of animals which they raised, particularly cattle and pigs. They identified the need to improve the forage availability and therefore agreed to improve these sections of the village by planting grass and legume forage species. The villagers believe that these will help to satisfy the qualitative and quantitative needs of the animals especially during the dry months when the growth of native grasses is poor.
Land use planning included the planted an area of 100 rai forage species. Subsequently, the villagers would transplant some of these grasses and legumes into other community areas designated for animal raising animals in the northern part of the village. The fencing of the initial area to prevent animals from straying out and disturbing crops nearby was also planned.
Areas for planting fruit trees and other perennials
Based on the analysis of area potential, about 250 rai located along the slopes that surround the village was considered suitable for planting fruit trees. The plan was to plant fruit trees together with the establishment of soil and water conservation measures (SWC) in the form of buffer strips to prevent soil erosion. The villagers believed that, in the long term, planting fruit trees would provide them an addition source of income besides raising animals. At present, the villagers have constructed a nursery and are producing fruit tree seedlings such as mango, peach and apricot which they intend to plant in the designated areas.
Areas for growing upland rice, annual crops and other cash crops
These areas, which were allocated for growing upland rice, annual crops and other cash crops, consisted of 3,200 rai, mostly found in the northern and north-eastern parts of the village. However, as these cultivation areas were quite limited, it is clear that production has to be efficient to attain optimum yields. The villagers have found that upland rice cultivation has to be carried out using a rotational cropping system in order to prevent weed build-up and related pest and disease problems. Each farming household needs 3-4 upland rice plots in order to meet household requirements. Each plot is normally planted for one year on a rotational basis, as shown in the illustration below.
Page 11 of 65
This figure illustrates the plan for upland rice cultivation in Ban Bor Krai, with 4 separate plots rotationally planted to upland rice.
The villagers also have 1-2 plots for the cultivation of other annual or cash crops. Rotational cropping using legume species to improve soil fertility and the establishment of soil and water conservation measures have been planned as being appropriate for these areas.
From the illustrations above, maize is an important basic crop gown by all households every year as the main feed for their pigs. The legumes, red kidney bean and lablab bean are sold as cash crops.
3. Community forest areas
In Ban Bor Krai, community forest areas refer to the sections of forest that surround the village but excluding areas cultivated with crops (including fallow land). The community forest area is also considered by the villagers to be very important. They have long depended on the forest as a source of wood for building and repairing their houses. They have also raised their animals in the forest, collected food and most recently forest products have become an important source of income. In other words, the villagers comparatively referred to their forest as their village "supermarket". It was therefore concluded that in order to achieve sustainable forest management, the various types of forest areas need to be clearly identified and their utilization carefully planned.
Watershed conservation forest
Located two (2) kilometers north of the village, this area surrounds the source of water that supplies the piped village domestic water system.
The villagers have planned to conserve this area, which covers some 3,200 rai, as a watershed conservation forest. This includes about 1,000 rai of land that was formerly cultivated. Planning also included the definition of restrictions against cutting trees in and around this area. Page 12 of 65
Multipurpose forest
This area is situated in the eastern part of the village, about 5 kilometers from the center of the community. Categorized as a multipurpose forest, it consists of some 80 rai of land. Within this area are trees that the villagers cut to build and repair their houses, and which they also utilize in many other ways. Trees include bamboo, hardwood, and others. Planning the management of this area emphasized the appropriate use of trees by setting up rules and regulations related to the cutting of trees, including guidelines on their proper use. All villagers have accepted and strictly implement these rules with full compliance.
Areas for collecting forest products
These are the areas which the villagers have allocated as forest product collection sites. There are 4 sections:
Section 1 is located in the east, about 6 kilometers from the village Section 2 is located to the northwest, about 2 kilometers from the village Sections 3 and 4 are located in the southwest, about 3 kilometers from the village
Planning for these areas has consisted of setting up of rules and regulations related to utilization and guidelines for their implementation particularly in relation to harvesting practices.
Cemetery forest
This area is located in the southwestern part of the village. Approximately 50 rai in size, the villagers used this area for funeral rites, either by cremation or burial. In their overall land use plan, the villagers consider the conservation of this area with high respect.
4. Implementation of activities and forming linkages with neighboring communities
The outputs of discussion meetings and the planning process together with consideration of other pertinent information concluded with identification of the community's natural resource utilization as indicated on the village model. The process allowed the villagers and project field staff to have a clearer view of the overall situation of Ban Bor Krai. The various symbols or signs used on the model served as a basis evidence to show how actual implementation had been planned and agreed. It also facilitated understanding and coordination amongst involved agencies, particularly in relation to requests by the community for financial support to carry out various activities.
1. Improvement of animal raising areas. The village coordinated with the district livestock office and request assistance in the form of forage seed and technical advice. A date was set to plant the seed in propagation plots using grasses such as Ruzi, violet guinea, and hamata stylo. These forages were planted for two years in succession. At present, the village has an area of 100 rai allocated for forage propagation and it is planned that these forages will be transplanted to other animal grazing areas during the following years.
2. Fruit tree planting. In requesting support for fruit seedlings, the village coordinated with several government and non- government agencies such as Pang Ma Pha district agricultural office, upland rice and temperate cereal crop research station, TG-HDP and the Huai Ma Keua Som center for highland agricultural extension (Muang district, Mae Hong Son). The following seedlings have been provided:
apricot = 500 seedlings
peach = 400 seedlings
mango (Kaew) = 650 seedlings
rattan = 600 seedlings
Apart from the seedlings provided as above, the villagers were also able to themselves produce other fruit seedlings in their own nurseries e.g. apricot, mango (Kaew) and peaches, which they expect to transplant between buffer strips next year.
3. Upland rice farming. It has been normal practice for most farmers to cultivate traditional or local rice varieties. Recently, however, some farmers were able to receive seed of improved upland rice varieties from several agencies including the upland rice and temperate cereal crop research station, district agricultural office and TG-HDP. Rice production continued to follow the rotational cropping system with only one plot being planted each year on a rotational basis. This rotational method is a modified and shorter version of the long rotational cropping cycle used by the Karen ethnic minority. The main reason for the villagers adopting this method has been to deal with the problem of weed build-up. In the past when more land was available, upland rice plots were cultivated for 2-3 seasons and then allowed to fallow for several years.
4. Field crop or annual crop farming. Plots for annual cropping are differentiated from upland rice plots in that they are alternately or rotationally planted with several different crops. Some farm households owned one such plot while others have 2 or more. For those with only one plot, they generally include a rotation with a legume crop and establish soil and water conservation measures, particularly on steeper slopes. Since it is planned for permanent land use, there is a need to employ longer and more sustainable conservation techniques to maintain and improve soil fertility. The villagers have been able to Page 13 of 65
coordinate with and request support for materials for the establishment of SWC from the Mae Hong Son Land Development Station (Unit 3). A variety of SWC strip materials, which have depended on the villager's particular interest, such as lemon grass, pineapple, vetiver grass, leucaena and pigeon pea, have been established.
5. Watershed forest improvement. After a meeting was held to discuss and implement the proposed boundary of the conservation watershed forest, the villagers began to plan for its rehabilitation. Since almost half of this area has previously been used as cultivated land or fallow field, the villagers considered it necessary to replant some areas. Other areas with more vegetative regrowth were left for natural regeneration of the forest to occur. The Ban Bor Krai villagers planned their replanting activities to be carried out successively for 3 years. Having received technical advice, the villagers were able to agree on these activities including the specific dates, times and plant species intended for replanting.
As part of their replanting preparations, the community organization again coordinated with involved government agencies to request for support in the form of seedlings and to invite representatives to participate during the actual tree planting. These agencies included the district forestry office, Pai wildlife sanctuary area office, TG-HDP and the Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network.. As a result, replanting has been held every year since 1995 and the following seedlings have been planted:
1995: 2,500 seedlings
1996: 3,500 seedlings
1997: 4,000 seedlings
After each planting, rules and regulations were set-up intended for the strict maintenance and conservation of the watershed forest.
6. Forest areas for multi-purpose use and product collection. In these cases, no tree planting activities were considered necessary. Nevertheless, the members of the community reached a common understanding on the appropriate methods to be employed for forest tree utilization and the set-up of rules and regulations accordingly to control such use. For example, the guidelines for community practice include such provisions as the necessity to obtain permission from the village committee to use wood and non-wood products for particular purposes.
Rules and regulations governing the collection or harvesting of forest products were set-up for the sections of the forest designated by the village as product collection areas. Appropriate rules were established such as in the harvesting of bamboo shoots, that at least 2 shoots must always be left to allow for fast growth recovery; or that orchid flowers should not be collected for commercial purposes. Other rules set-up for strict compliance include that during the collection of vegetables and other ornamental plants, only flowers and not the stems can be cut.. Any violations would be dealt with in the following ways:
First violation would merit a warning by the village committee. Second violation would involve payments of a 300 Baht-fine to the village committee. Third violation would be handed over for arrest by the village committee. If violations involved the cutting of trees, replanting must be done. If violations involved removing orchid plants for sale, first violation would receive warning. second violation would involve being arrested and handed over to the police authorities.
7. Establishment of community land use maps. Following community discussions and agreement on short and long term land use plans, this new information was marked onto the 3-dimensional model. The model was extensively used during meetings and discussions and it was found that continually introducing new information, for instance on current land use and future plans, was becoming increasingly difficult. Monitoring of land use changes from year to year was also proving difficult to accurately follow and measure on a single model. It was therefore considered necessary to transfer actual annual land use information from the model onto a land use map.
In the case of Ban Bor Krai, the land use mapping was jointly carried out by villagers and project field staff during a training session on "community land use mapping" in April 1996. Land use maps were completed for 1995, 1996 whilst in 1997 the map was produced by the villagers themselves with minimal support from the project.
5. Strengthening of community organization and network
Community organization is considered the most important target of the development process of community land-use management (CLM). The strengths or the weaknesses of community organization is a strong indicator of the community situation. Based considerable experience in implementing CLM, it has become evident that community development has been as a result of the many activities, including:
1. Study field trips to other community organizations to learn from their experiences.
2. Training conducted for members of the village committee and other interested villagers mainly in a workshop format to allow for actual practice by small groups e.g. on land use planning.
3. Training of villagers who have the potential to become local resource persons particularly for community natural resource management and plant propagation. Page 14 of 65
4. The holding of discussion forums to facilitate exchanges of experience among villagers from the same sub-district and at both tambon and village levels.
5. The briefing of visitors to the community, including senior government officers from provincial level, It has been found that this activity is one means by which the understanding and confidence of the community organization can be increased.
6. A forum was also held in conjunction with the natural resource management section of the Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network. Actually, this network has been formed mainly with the support of Ban Bor Krai community leaders. Their continued involvement is evident as several Ban Bor Krai leaders are office holders in the Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network and have contributed to the network's steady growth and development. It can be stated, therefore, that the strength of both the community and network organizations have reached a certain level and are now being developed in parallel with each other.
6. Dissemination of results and experiences of the community to other areas and contribution of experiences for policy development
Ban Bor Krai is one of the villages in T. Pang Ma Pha which has substantially contributed to the establishment of the Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network Organization, in particular, the natural resource management section. Ban Bor Krai itself has developed good resource management practices and has already served as a model example for other villages to follow. The dissemination, and expansion of the community's accumulated experiences has followed 3 strategies:
1. In the form of monthly meetings where experiences were disseminated through the Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network (natural resource management section).
2. By becoming local resource persons to other villages in order to broaden not only their own experiences but also those of the others.
3. By providing briefings to study field trip participants who have visited the area. The visitors have come from Mae Hong Son province, other neighboring provinces and even other countries. Many senior officers from various government departments and centres of higher learning e.g. universities, have formed the greater part of such visiting group. This is one channel which is considered relatively significant since its impact contributes to the consideration of appropriate resource management strategies at policy level.
III. Summary
As a result of the implementation of community land use management (CLM) in Ban Bor Krai since 1994, several important impacts have been observed. These indicate the overall importance and significance that natural resource management has had not only in Ban Bor Krai itself, but in relation to improve resource management in other villages in Pang Ma Pha district. Based on the implementation of all the related activities already carried out, the results could be summarized as follows:
1. As a result of the study and analysis of the community and the process of information feedback, the members of the community were able to gain an overview of how they use all their natural resources. This enabled them to analyse any problems, identify potentials and begin to plan the long term utilization of community resources as follows:
Total village area 9,396.25 rai divided into
Community forest 5,946.25 rai
watershed conservation forest (ordained forest) 5,486.00 rai
forest product collection area 310.25 rai
multipurpose forest 100.00 rai
cemetery/burial forest 56.00 rai
Agricultural area 3,450.00 rai
cultivation area in 1995 392 rai
cultivation area in 1996 324 rai
cultivation area in 1997 360 rai
grass propagation area 100 rai
orchard 250 rai Page 15 of 65
Note: The cultivation area is used on a rotational farming system basis, particularly for growing upland rice. Therefore, apart from areas permanently planted with fruit trees or used for grass propagation, only some 10% of this designated area is actually cultivated each year.
In summary, community forest covers 63.3% of the total area, whilst 36.7% is for agriculture. In 1995, only 11% of the agricultural area or 4% of the total land was actually cultivated.
As for 1996, only 9% of the agricultural area or 3.45% of the total land area was used.
In 1997, about 10.5% of the agricultural area was cultivated, equivalent to 3.8% of the total community area.
2. Some 14 villagers participated in improving the cultivation area by establishing the soil and water conservation measures along steep slopes.
3. There have also been improvements to the animal raising areas:
3.1 Establishment of a grass propagation area (100 rai) that was planted for 2 years consecutively.
3.2 Establishment of a fence surrounding the grazing area (about 1,000 rai) situated in the northern part of the village.
4. The watershed forest has also rehabilitated by planting 300 rai to fruit trees for 3 successive years. Other parts (about 1,000 rai) were left as fallow fields and allowed to regenerate naturally.
5. Community rules and regulations were established for the management of natural resources. There is some variation in the strictness of these rules and regulations depending on the importance of any particular resource to the village. For example, the implementation of rules and regulations for the watershed conservation forest, such as in the cutting of trees and hunting, are stricter for the non-community members than for the villagers themselves,
6. The community organization has been strengthened and gained more confidence in managing community natural resources. Each member of the community now understands their responsibilities and uses community forest areas in accordance with the agreed rules and regulations. Ban Bor Krai has served as a valuable example to other neighboring villages and has played an important role in the establishment of the natural resources management section within the Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network.
7. The section of the forest area specifically intended for product collection has been appropriately managed.
IV. Lessons Learned
From the implementation of community land use planning in Ban Bo Krai since 1994, project field staff and the villagers have learned the following lessons:
1. The conduct of a village forum to analyze the natural resource management situation enabled the community to give due attention to the impact of various resource management practices. For instance, rice cultivation in a watershed forest area was found to cause a decrease in the village water supply. This raised the awareness of the community organization and led to concrete action to improve, rehabilitate and conserve the watershed forest.
2. The incorporation of the cultural traditions and beliefs of the hilltribe people, such as tree ordination and ceremonial rites for spirits, into the process of conservation of natural resources increased the participation of community members and strengthened community organization.
3. Community participation at meetings or for the implementation of action plans is increased if they are organised during national working holidays or religious holidays (wan pra) when the people (particularly the Black Lahu tribe) do not work in their fields.
4. The development of community leadership potential is an important factor in the sustainable development of the community. Increased confidence and capability in coordinating with outside agencies improves the opportunities to benefit from the services they provide.
5. During implementation of the natural resources management and sustainable agricultural development processes, it was found that the female members of the community contributed very significantly to the achievement of community objectives.
6. When a community practices subsistence agriculture that does not emphasize economic crop production, the management of community resources is better and can be more readily improved.
V. Remarks and Recommendations Page 16 of 65
1. There are several limitations or constraints to the development of the agricultural system in Ban Bor Krai including its situation in a mountainous region and distance from water sources of water. In spite of these factors, the villagers have raised animals especially cattle and pigs, to provide their basic source of income. More recently, however, the villagers encountered some problems in raising their animals related to the limited available land area. In order to increase the confidence of the villagers in being able to continue to gain income from animal raising, there is a need for this activity to be developed into a more permanent occupation through the propagation of grasses and transplanting them into permanent pasture areas. This would increase the availability of forage towards sufficiency for the number of animals being raised in the community.
2. The community should continue to coordinate with the Land Development Office in order to receive LDO support in the establishment of soil and water conservation measures (SWC) on sloping land. This will help to conserve and improve the soil fertility of the existing, but limited area suitable for cultivation and ensure long term sustainable use for the community.
3. As the sale of non-wood forest products has become a major source of income, households which sell these products should form a marketing group. Every year, the villagers collectively gain about 200,000 Baht in income from these sales. However, it was found that there has been little cooperation between households and in fact some rivalries during selling have resulted. In many instances, products are left unsold, partly due to the sellers not agreeing on common prices. In order to improve the management of marketing of these products, it is considered necessary to form an organisation to unite forest product collectors and link them with groups from other villages such as Ban Ja Bo and Ban Luk Khao Lam. The Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network organization (natural resources management section) should coordinate such an action to ensure the sustainability of this enterprise into the future.
4. Villages should attempt to seek sources of funding for the improvement of their irrigation system to enable an intensification of farming practices to occur.
Community-Based Land Use Planning and Natural Resource Management
A Case Study of Ban Huai Hea, Moo 8, Tambon Pang Ma Pha,
Pang Ma Pha District, Mae Hong Son Province
by Prasong Jantakad
I. Background
Ban Huai Hea, a key village established by the Department of Local Administration, is located in Moo 8, Tambon Pang Ma Pha, Pang Ma Pha district, Mae Hong Son province. The population is predominately Black Lahu hilltribe and consists of 200 people with 44 families in 37 households. The village settlement is situated within the national conservation forest area, 26 kilometers from Pang Ma Pha district, near the northern border with Myanmar (Burma).
1. Village settlement
Ban Huai Hea was established as a local settlement 50 years ago, when its people dwelt around the Mae La Na and Nam Pong watershed areas. Most settlers came originally from Sam Muen mountains in Chiang Dao district, Chiang Mai province, while some migrated from Doi Khu in Myanmar (Burma). The main reason for their migration was to seek fertile land for planting opium. Huai Hea became recognized 10 years ago and is now considered a key village in the district. The initial settlement was characterized by dwellings grouped in areas along mountain ridges over the streams of Huai Nam Pong and Huai Mae La Na. These streams, which served as a main source of water for home consumption (pipe water, irrigation system etc.), were situated about 3 km away from the nearest household, and the surrounding areas of the village were used for cultivation. The only school in the village was placed under the jurisdiction of the Office of Primary Education.
2. Production system
In the past, the villagers cultivated mostly plants for subsistence. Upland rice was produced mainly for consumption while corn was grown for animal feed. Opium provided the main source of income because of soil suitability for production and Ban Huai Hea's locality with Burma. Farming areas within the village were less fertile than those in Burma, and so, villagers often crossed the border to plant opium and rice and obtain a higher yield. In the village, only 15 rai of paddy field existed, located on both sides of the Mae La Na stream and owned by 3 families. The villagers also raised animals in a free range system, which included cattle, pigs, and chickens. Each family had an average land tenure of 6 plots, and almost every household raised pigs and chickens in their own backyard for spiritual or religious purposes.
3. Situation of natural resources
Ban Huai Hea had limited natural resources, particularly in land and forest, due mainly to its establishment within the two watershed forests of Mae La Na and Nam Pong. The surrounding areas of the village were not fertile, owing to no actual Page 17 of 65
management of natural resources, and the people in the community had no knowledge of conservation. Basically, the Lahu people were regarded as pioneers of swidden or shifting cultivation and when earth fertility began to decline, the whole village moved to richer soil. The villagers exercised no control over the use of their natural resources. Some people used them extensively until they had rapidly depleted. This was one of the main reasons for the conflict that existed between Huai Hea and its neighbouring villages, as the natural resource of Mae La Na stream was shared by all. There were no rules and regulations. Villagers also obtained forest wood products, mainly for the construction and repair of their own houses, and no commercial trade with non-villagers occurred.
II. Problems-Solving Process Through Land Use Planning and Natural Resource Management by the Community Organization
The crop plots, thus, making them harder to manage. The concept, process, objectives and working steps of community based land use and local watershed management (CLM), which have been applied in Ban Huai Hea, are described in Section 2 of this document. The main target of the CLM process in this village can be summarized as:
The members of the community have a clear understanding of the existing situation of natural resources in their own community. They gain actual knowledge in the appropriate use of these resources, including an increased ability on the part of community organizations to manage them. Effective planning for short and long term land use is carried out, and rules and regulations are created to guide natural resource utilization.
1. Wagers' experience
Even though the villagers of Ban Huai Hea have been living in Thailand for over half a century, they have not yet settled in a permanent place for more than a period of 10 years. This has been because the dominant population of Lahu found it natural to practice shifting cultivation. The people of the community had neither a basic concept in the proper conservation of natural resources nor any experience whatsoever concerning land use planning. They had been more inversely exposed towards destruction, particularly of the forest. In selecting land for crop production, they usually chose areas that appeared to be most productive and never considering its economic value or whether it was a watershed area. This might explain why many watershed areas have been destroyed or encroached, or why they have been selected by many villagers as crop cultivation sites. On the other hand, few villagers have had experience in practicing conservation measures for earth and water by establishing grass strips to prevent soil erosion. Between 1987 and 1990, Ban Huai Hea was a target of the TG-HDP's soil and water conservation (SWC) programme, which aimed particularly at reducing soil erosion.
However, by 1991 the villagers largely ceased using SWC measures because:
1. There were no longer any incentives to support the programme. 2. They did not control grass growth properly, which later spread to the main
3. They had been cultivating the same area for 2-3 years consecutively and crop plots, thus, making them harder to manage started to face problems of increasing weed pressure. Although they increased labour to control weeds, crop yields still decreased.
4. They had no experience in successive crop production or permanent land use because their main background in farming was shifting cultivation.
2. Land use planning and natural resource management by the community organization
The TG-HDP has been promoting the development of Ban Huai Hea since 1983. However, between 1983-1993, their working concept started to emphasize more on the support of financial budget and technical know-how, particularly towards government agencies that were directly responsible for the village. After having received the knowledge from the TG-HDP, these government agencies had to implement the technology for the villagers. This working concept was referred to as a package extension type and was sometimes called the top down approach.
Based on evaluation of the results of implementing CLM in 6 test run villages in Pang Ma Pha district, it was found that the working approach used was generally effective in contributing towards increased community participation. Therefore, in 1994, implementation of the CLM programme was extended to include 7 more villages in the target area of Pang Ma Pha district, including Ban Huai Hea.
The TG-HDP commenced using a participatory working process in Ban Huai Hea in 1993 by assigning a member of the project field staff to work with the community. However, at that time it emphasized mainly on problem resolutions related to drug prevention. The CLM programme was able to build upon community involvement initiated in dealing with drug abuse problems, using the 6 working steps as described in Section 2 of this document.
Preparation of concept
This first stage of the development comprised a meeting held among the field and implementation agencies concerned to prepare themselves regarding technical aspects and knowledge, including the process of working with the villagers. In the past, Ban Huai Hea was one of the target villages for development by the Division of Hilltribe Welfare and Development under the Department of Public Welfare (DPW) of the Ministry of Interior Affairs. In a development project at village level, a field staff Page 18 of 65
officer was permanently assigned to stay among the villagers. However, in 1994, the DPW was placed under the Ministry of Labour and Social Services and this consequently caused a change in the policies of the department towards social welfare services. Hence, this initial stage of the project involved only its field staff officers and the villagers themselves, and together, they tried to fully understand the CLM concept.
Monitoring and assessing present community land use and natural resource management (NRM)
At this stage, the actual study of the community was initiated. The TG-HDP community development staff coordinator conducted a study on rural system analysis (RSA), which was designed to attempt collection of ail pertinent village information on methods of community resource management, village leadership, and other interested groups in the community. The study also included an analysis of the potential and limitations of the community in relation to its NRM.
A model (2) on the topography of the village was brought as a tool for discussion among the villagers. After analysis of all the information gathered, it was found that the three main areas used by villagers as cultivation sites were:
1. The areas around the village used for planting corn, beans and/or other annual crops.
2. The areas found on both sides of Mae La Na stream, where people planted paddy rice. Only 2-3 farmers owned these areas, but about 400-500 rai had the potential to be developed into paddy.
3. The areas bordering Burma (Myanmar), used by 3 out of 4 villagers as a crop cultivation site.
During the community study process, information was collected through monthly meetings of the target village or, occasionally, with interested parties or focus groups. Results of the study also showed that the village committee was the main organization most responsible for supervising land use and the NRM of the village, although there had been no actual or real management. There was one water resource (hill irrigation) that people used for home consumption, located 3 kilometers north of the village. The areas surrounding it were cultivated with upland rice by 6 or 7 farmers. The study also found that the soil fertility along farming areas surrounding the village was very low with a very shallow soil surface and rocky structure. On the other hand, those surrounding Doi Pha Wae, close to the border of Ban Pha Puek, had higher soil fertility. All these information details were indicated in the topographic model by using different coloured markings: dark green = forest (general); yellow = paddy field; dark blue = conserved watershed forest; light green = cultivated land etc.
Planning for land use and NRM within the community.
After the community study was completed and resulting information was fed back (feed back process) to the villagers, the data was analyzed. Different types of community resources were identified by the project in order to provide more convenient management, as follow:
area for dwelling (residential) area for paddy rice cultivation including parts which have the potential for paddy development area for watershed or conservation forest (found in the north) area as multipurpose forest found in 3 sites: 1) pine tree forest in the north; 2) bamboo forest in the south; and 3) multipurpose or community forest in the north (cultivated forest established together with the Mae Hong Son Forestry Office) area intended as cemetery forest (eastern area) area for crop cultivation (around the village) area as general forest area for animal grazing.
After identification of these different types of community resources, their actual sizes were calculated so that guidelines and development planning for their efficient use could be provided. Based on discussions held with the villagers, it was discovered that problems had started when they crossed over into Burma to continue their opium and rice cultivation. The land they farmed used to be under the influence of Khun Sa, but later, these areas were taken over by the Burmese army. This created a difficult situation for the villagers and so they agreed to develop on their own land in Thailand. They did so by carrying out the following:
1. Participatory planning for the development of land that has the potential to become paddy fields by initially improving the irrigation system. With the support of the project, this land would have to be cleared or dug prior to actual paddy development. The TG-HDP supported the budget to improve the irrigation system, particularly for the purchase of construction material. On the other hand, the villagers agreed to distribute these paddy areas to all families, especially to those without. In summary, almost all families were allocated land except for two: 1) a single old man, and 2) one family that had just moved into the community and its members were still staying with relatives.
2. Planning for the improvement of watershed forest (source of water supply for the village), where villagers agreed to construct a permanent boundary to enclose a 2 rai section of the watershed conservation forest that was planned for replanting in two successive years. In the remaining section of the forest, particularly the 400-rai area that was held previously for crop cultivation, trees were allowed to grow naturally. Moreover, rules and regulations were set up for the use of multipurpose forest or collection of forest products (either conservation or general forest). Different types of forests had different rules and regulations. For example, cutting down trees in the watershed forest was not allowed, and forest firebreaks were required, especially during the dry season. As for other types of forests, such as multipurpose, villagers were allowed to cut down trees as long as they had permission from the village council committee (for wood needed solely to build or repair Page 19 of 65
people's houses or make tools used in farming or household chores). Villagers were not allowed to sell any forest products to non-villagers or collect any other wood or firewood products.
3. The area intended for animal raising consisted of an idle l000-rai fallow field with a boundary marked by villagers. Within this field, villagers developed a communal grazing area for the animals raised by the whole village. Napier grass was planted to serve primarily as animal feed and also, provide shade to the animals.
4. In planning for the enhancement of the agricultural system, apart from paddy field development, the villagers included plans for soil improvement to prevent its erosion through the establishment of an SWC area. This was done by planting leucaena, pigeon pea, lemon grass and pineapple in plant strips around the cultivated areas near the northwestern section of the village, and in the slopes of the southeastern section,
5. Plans for planting more fruit trees along slopes that were once considered inappropriate for growing cash or annual crops e.g. lime, peach, apricot, and mango. The project also planned to hold study trips on fruit tree production for community leaders or other farmers interested in increasing their knowledge, skills and concern in orchard establishment.
Implementation of activities
After planning was completed, initial steps were taken to ensure the participation of the villagers in improving the irrigation system and paddy fields, and building interest and cooperation among the farmers. The financial budget for materials and equipment was then approved by the TG - HDP in support of the construction of water channels and their technical aspects, while labour was provided by the villagers themselves. After the flow of water was diverted towards the paddy fields successfully, the villagers cooperated in digging up the soil to prepare it for crop cultivation. They then took turns in helping one villager a day. However, as most of the villagers in Ban Huai Hea had never obtained experience in making paddy fields, it was recommended that they hire an expert or someone (also Lahu) with a knowledge of paddy rice farming to supervise construction and/or advise the farmers. During the first year, the villagers were able to build 11 paddy fields by digging soil using the rotational group working system. After the second year, the number had increased to 18 and, at present, there are 24 paddy fields at an average of 3 rai per household. In the second and third years, using an individual method completed the work. It could be expected, however, that this activity will continue each year and the farmers participating will plan to make as many fields as possible. Collectively, the villagers also contributed 5,000 Baht to cover the expenses involved for the improvement to the irrigation system.
After the watershed forest boundaries had been identified and indicated clearly, the villagers started to replant trees to improve or rehabilitate the area with support from the Royal Forestry Department (RFD) through the watershed management unit in Pang Ma Pha district and the Pai wildlife sanctuary office. The latter provided tree seedlings. The villagers also prepared some seedlings themselves, particularly Tong Kor. Reforestation was completed by the villagers in 2-years successively. They then became very interested and, therefore, lent their cooperation towards the success of this activity. It is believed that this action created an intense awareness and a sense of belonging among the villagers towards the conservation of their own natural resources. In the case of an outsider who came to rear animals in this forest, but was later driven out by the villagers of Ban Huai Hea, a clear example of how the villagers had become aware of the ownership of their forest was evident. Also, during each dry season, the villagers have made firebreaks together around the watershed forest.
With regard to the development of community grassland for animal raising, the villagers coordinated with the livestock district office to request its support for grass seeds and seedlings so as to improve their community grazing area. The villagers also managed to put up fences around the animal raising site, which was previously the idle fallow field and part of a natural forest (see 2.2III above). It is expected that a larger area of rai in this field will be planted with grass in the future.
Apart from developing paddy fields, the villagers planned to improve their agricultural system by increasing soil fertility on the farms of nearby villages. The people coordinated with the land development agency (unit 3) in Pang Ma Pha district in requesting support for the procurement of materials, e.g. lemon grass and pineapple, for making SWC measures. Twenty- seven farmers participated in this activity by planting fruit trees along SWC strips. This method was recommended because these areas were not considered suitable for annual cropping, especially as they were shallow and less fertile.
During the implementation of those activities indicated in the action plan, the project also held a forum to enable the villagers to exchange their ideas and experiences with people from other villages nearby. This was one way to spread information and allow the villagers to confirm the boundary allocated for each type of community resource. The forum focused on two major issues, with which the other villages could neither accept nor agree. Those issues were:
1. The villagers of Ban Pha Puek protested by claiming that the boundary adjoining their village and the eastern part of Ban Huai Hea favoured the latter. After holding 3 forum meetings, a discussion and agreement were recorded and the problem was subsequently solved.
2. The villagers living in the downstream area of Ban Mae Lana claimed that those from Ban Huai Hea should not cultivate their crops around the watershed area, but develop more of their paddy fields instead. During the discussion, the villagers from Ban Huai Hea also agreed with this idea. After recording the discussion, the people from the two villages agreed that there would be no expansion of the cultivated area around the watershed and in future, they would grow fruit trees in place of annual crops. During the process of problem resolution, the villagers from Ban Mae Lana requested the intervention of the Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network, which indeed played an important role in solving this conflict.
After initiating the plans for land use and resource management, which included setting-up agreed rules and regulations, all relevant information was finalized for incorporation in the village model that could be used as a basic document for community land use mapping. The entire information shown in the model would then serve as technical data to indicate the geographic Page 20 of 65
characteristics of the village such as the actual land size and relative position. In practicality, however, the utilization of land use mapping was rather limited because the villagers lacked the basic knowledge related to geographic mappings and calculations and, most importantly, a majority could neither read nor write Thai. Likewise, the capability of some project staff officers was limited in relation to this aspect although they had already undergone some previous training.
Strengthening of community organization
This stage refers to the development of community leadership, particularly regarding NRM. To provide opportunities for community leaders to exchange experiences with their peers, support for study trips and training both within and outside the project area was provided for several village leaders. However, the greatest benefit for these leaders was the opportunity for frequent discussions on relevant matters with project staff officers. Therefore, a greater understanding was reached on many ideas such as planning, land use and management of watershed areas. This proved an effective method for converting village leaders to support and accept the group that would push community land use planning at network, Tambon, provincial and even policy level.
When the TG-HDP invited the heads of several provincial government agencies to visit the village, it provided the community organization with a chance to represent themselves. It increased their ability and confidence to conduct their own NRM.
Dissemination of and linkage to policy development
There was very little actual involvement by the community organization towards policy development during this stage. However, it was able to contribute by holding a summary briefing on Ban Huai Hea village implementation to the visiting organizations that came to conduct their field study. The visitors included a group led by the 1996 vice-governor of Mae Hong Son.
Likewise, the community organization cooperated by indicating their support for the working process of CLM at network and TAO levels. Two villagers were appointed as committee members of the NRM section of Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network.
III. Summary if the implementation
The implementation of CLM initiated at Ban Huai Hea in 1994 produced a strong impact in several aspects. During the community study process, when information was fed back feed back process) to the community, the latter provided an overview of the whole organization and how much resource it had. This was made possible through the identification and classification of their resources, indicated as follows:
1. Residential area 93 rai
2. Paddy field 500 rai
3. Conservation watershed forest 1,744 rai
4. Multipurpose forest 500 rai
5. Cemetery forest 125 rai
6. Cultivated /agriculture area 1,982 rai
7. Natural forest 6,081 rai
Later, all the potential and limitations for each type of resource were included in land use planning after the following analysis:
1. In the past, only 3 farmers were able to cultivate paddy fields in a total of 15 rai. But after analysis, it was found that about 500 rai on both sides of the Mae Lana stream had the potential to be improved as paddy. At present, there are about 24 farmers growing paddy rice in a 70-rai area with an irrigation system that was fully improved. However, during the process of monitoring or the follow-up to the action plan implementation, this particular community activity (development of potential paddy fields) was considered comparatively slow. This may be due to the villagers' lack of experience in making paddy farms or their continued obscurity when farming on Burmese soil, since this was still possible.
2. Plans for land use of the area around the village considered fruit tree planting, since most of the soil had a rocky structure and was less fertile. During the first stage of implementation, about 27 villagers planted some annual crops and also established the buffer strip as an SWC measure.
3. The villagers also agreed to cultivate the area found near Doi Pha Wae in the southwestern part of the village, adjacent to Ban Pha Puek. Annual crops such as upland rice, corn, legumes and others, were cultivated here because the soil had higher fertility and greater depth. It was recommended that rotational cropping was a more suitable practice.
4. The watershed forest (water supply area) undertook a 2-year succession of conservation and reforestation and the boundary was established to enclose this 1,744 rai area. The villagers fully participated in conserving this area by imposing Page 21 of 65
strict rules and regulations, and by also establishing a forest tiebreak during the dry season. One section of this area, measuring about 400 rai, was previously cultivated by six farmers. They were later asked by the villagers to cease farming and allow the tress to grow naturally so as to return the forest to its natural state.
5. The villagers of Ban Huai Hea were able to establish strict rules and regulations in three community or multipurpose forests in order to allow an efficient use of resources. The rules also covered the use of other community resources, which were not officially documented. However, the villagers were readily aware of them.
6. The conversion of grassy areas into those for communal animal raising provided better management of land. Fencing and planting more grass, which reduced the conflict between animal and crop farming, were among various improvements the villagers made to this area of about 1,000 rai.
Examples of village rules and regulations
1. Do not cut trees and cultivate the land around the watershed area.
2. Do not cultivate the areas found in the multipurpose forest.
3. Do not cultivate crops in the cemetery area.
4. Cutting trees for sale is not allowed except for the construction or repair of village housing and fuel/firewood.
5. For the non-villagers who want to use trees in the multipurpose forest, permission must first be secured from the village committee.
IV. Lessons learned
1. The community's identification and classification of resources into types or sections, enabled its villagers to determine how much still existed. It allowed them to become deeply aware of their limitations and encouraged them to use, develop and improve these resources in a sustainable way.
2. The model was considered an effective tool in attracting the interest of the villagers during discussions or meetings, as it allowed them to have a clearer overview of their community and its resources. The exchange of ideas occurred spontaneously and continuously and agreements were easily reached with the objective fulfilled conveniently.
3. The establishment of specific village boundaries could not be carried out precisely because of the villages' very close proximity. There was a particular need, therefore, to conduct a forum and invite neighbours from other villages to discuss, express and listen to opinions so that agreements could be reached by the parties in conflict.
4. Conducting the working process under CLM allowed the community organization to increase its capability and awareness or sense of belonging towards remaining community resources. This was shown by their ability to disallow the non villagers' encroachment of forest belonging to their village. The implementation also allowed the villagers to increase their self- confidence in managing their existing natural resources, as indicated by their skill in planning for the improvement and efficient use of the forest.
5. In the implementation of NRM, the major factor of the area's cultivation for human survival was considered. NRM would only be successful with the full cooperation and participation of the villagers. This would allow them to live on their own land that would be sufficient for their food and occupation. Should the people have insufficient food, a higher probability of forest encroachment would exist and the implementation of any action plan would be unsuccessful.
6. The villagers' implementation of the development and expansion of the cultivation area was considered a slow process for the following reasons.
6.1 Some villagers still had the alternative of venturing onto Burmese soil to secretly indulge in opium cultivation.
6.2 The Black Lahu villagers of Ban Huai Hea had neither the experience nor skills in paddy farming. Therefore, subsequent farm management was poor, particularly in the maintenance of the water channels and farm tools. These necessities were later found to be in need of repair or were quantitatively insufficient for use in land preparation. Apart from this, the villagers were instinctively afraid of using buffaloes in their farm activities.
6.3 Despite digging the soil for crop cultivation during the first and the second years, the villagers were still unable to grow any plants because of the low soil fertility. The villagers became afraid that the eventual harvest would not be adequate for their own consumption because of the low yield predicted. This would be sufficient reason for some villagers to cross over to the Page 22 of 65
Burmese side to cultivate rice or opium, or even encroach new sections of the forest. However, during the third year of planting rice, farm yields increased. It was recommended, therefore, that during the first and second years, the farmers should fully cooperate together in finding an alternative to their low yield in rice farming so that they would not be extensively affected by the result.
6.4 During planning with the villagers for land use and NRM, the project found that they had become increasingly aware of their existing natural resource management and indicated their intention to participate. When analyzed, the following results materialized.
The villagers provided their own permanent settlement. They had learned to exchange their experiences with other community organizations within and outside the project area. They were able to gain knowledge and experience from joining study trips. They were exposed to examples of adverse problems/resolutions such as social differences and a shortage of drinking water in nearby Ban Pha Daeng.
They conducted discussions or the exchange of ideas, particularly at provincial level, with public officers from visiting government agencies, who encouraged the villagers to grow in confidence.
V. Suggestions
1. The participation of both the villagers and project staff officers in making initial plans for paddy development, resulted in their implementation being considered moderately expeditious, especially during the first year (11 paddy farms were provided for 11 farmers). This number increased to 18 rice farms in the second year and to 24 during the third. However, from these, only 18 farms were actually planted with rice seedlings. The original planning of this activity indicated that every village household was to have its own paddy rice farm. Observations also showed that during the second and third years, the rotational group working system ceased and most villagers began to work individually. As a result, the development of the paddy farms became slower unexpectedly. It was also noted that some villagers still continued to encroach towards the watershed area of Mae La Na stream, while several other villagers crossed the border into Burma and continued their farming practices. These cases occurred despite the very high potential for paddy land development.
In order that the implementation of paddy farm development may fulfill the objective and target set by the project, there was a necessity to review the impact of forest encroachment around the watershed area and the continuing crop production on Burmese soil. The initial method of a rotational group working system (digging the soil and preparing the paddy farm) was considered effective. However, to increase efficiency, the discussions and resulting agreement regarding the rules and regulations of this activity should be written and recorded as an official document, and must be imposed on and followed by everyone in the community.
2. For those villagers who ceased farming in Burma, an alternative must be provided to compensate them for the loss and low yield they would attain from cultivating crops in the village. To maintain the sustainability of their income, crop production in paddy fields should be continued after the rice harvest. They should be provided with the encouragement and incentives to plant crops e.g. vegetables and legumes, for both cash and household consumption. The office of district agriculture might be requested especially to support some production factors.
3. A discussion forum must be held to review the rules and regulations regarding the case of some villagers who encroached the watershed forest around Mae Lana stream. Communities such as Ya Pa Nae, Mae Lana or even Ban Huai Hea, which are located in the lower section (downstream), were definitely affected by this situation, particularly by the water supply used for paddy rice farming. The existing rules and regulations pertaining to this situation might not be relevant or practical, and there would certainly be some misunderstanding among the villagers who might not intend to follow the rules agreed upon. The review should also include the boundaries indicated for each type of natural resource in order to make the picture clearer for each member of the community.
4. Signboards or posters must support the identification and classification of each type of natural resource. This would ensure clarity to the members of the community and non-villagers alike so as all types of natural resources are recognized and the rules and regulations complied with.
5. Animal raising is considered an important aspect of the villagers' lives. Therefore, existing grassland should be developed and improved to provide sufficient types and quantities of grass to support their animals.
Natural Resource Management by Network Organization
A Case Study of Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network Organization
Tambon Pang Ma Pha, Pang Ma Pha District, Mae Hong Son Province Page 23 of 65
by Prasong Jantakad (1)
I. Background
Located about 60 kilometers from the provincial capital, Pang Ma Pha is one of seven districts in the province of Mae Hong Son.
With its northern and western borders adjoining Burma (or Myanmar), Pang Ma Pha district is situated adjacent to the past territorial influence of Khun Sa, once considered to be the world's leading drug lord. The district is populated by very diverse ethnic groups such as Shan, Karen, Hmong, Black and Red Lahu, and Lisu. Its physical geography comprises steep sloping mountains of complex limestone, and is therefore referred to in the following lines:
"The place where the spirits exist, the land of a hundred caves. A graceful mountain stands, a land where many hilltribes throng."
There are four hamlets or Tambons in Pang Ma Pha district, namely: Pang Ma Pha; Tham Lod; Sobpong; and, Na Pu Porn. Eleven villages: Mae Lana; Pang Kham; Mai Hung; Ja Bo; Ya Pa Nae; Pha Daeng; Mai Lan; Huai Hea; Luk Khao Lam; Pha Puek; and Bo Krai including 3 satellite villages not officially recognized by the Thai government. These being Pang Kam Noi (satellite to Mai Hung), Pha Charoen (satellite to Ya Pa Nae), and Nam Jang (satellite to Pang Kham), and the Black Lahu, Shan and Red Lahu hilltribes mostly inhabit them.
1. Nature of village settlement
Most villages in Tambon Pang Ma Pha were established recently as permanent settlement areas through the Department of Local Administration. A majority of these are 15-25 years of age, but Mae Lana, Pang Kham and Mai Hung are more than 100 years old. migrants from Burma, who settled in Thailand over 40 years ago, make up the larger portion of the village population. After crossing into Thailand, these people lived as nomads. They built temporary houses before moving on after the cropping season, especially when soil fertility began to decline or rice yields decreased. This practice of shifting cultivation, usually involved the whole village. In the past, the government could not contact these villages because of their remote location and inaccessibility. However, at present, the government is able to reach these communities because of extensive road improvements.
2. Production system
Formerly, subsistence production was the main system used by the villagers. Rice was cultivated to serve them as the basic staple diet, while opium was grown as a cash crop. This agricultural system and land-use were classified as shifting crop cultivation. Opium production was considered risky because land preparation for planting must be thorough and its growth very dependent on climatic conditions. Sometimes, villagers were unable to obtain any harvest for several years. Apart from opium and rice production, some villagers raised several types of livestock and they let the animals fend for themselves in the forest. Corn was grown solely as animal feed, especially for pigs. Meanwhile, paddy rice was often cultivated in flat areas on both sides of the Mae Lana stream, which has been inhabited by mostly Shan people.
3. Situation of natural resources
In Tambon Pang Ma Pha, resources belonging to the conserved forest area, are classified as 2 types:
1. Wildlife sanctuary found in the southern and eastern sections.
2. National conservation forest found in the northern and western sections.
Approximately 60% of the region lies in the national conservation forest area, which contains the Mae Lana stream (Lam Huai Mae Lana). The flat areas surrounding the stream are utilized mainly for growing paddy rice. In the past., the forest resources in this area were bountiful with ample water for rice production. In time, as the human population began to increase rapidly, the demand for these resources began to rise. There was also no apparent utilization pattern or system and no discipline over the people. Furthermore, there were no plans forthcoming for resource utilization. It was not long before the forest began to deteriorate and lose its value. Later, the Royal Forestry Department (RFD) took on the responsibility of forest management on its own. There was no participation from the villagers who had neither sense of awareness nor feeling of ownership for natural resources. Many villagers encroached some forest areas, particularly those near the stream. This caused a severe water shortage, which affected the paddy fields adversely, especially during the dry season. Many conflicts arose regarding land use in the villages and the boundaries between village and Tambon. Certain village groups, non-village people or a mixture of both, tried to make profit from cutting trees and processing them for commercial gain. The reason why all this was allowed to occur could be put down to the fact that there was no people's organization consisting of villagers who could actually maintain or manage these resources by themselves. There were no set rules and regulations governing natural resource use and, evidently, there was no community forum or informal stage of discussion held to allow people to exchange their ideas and experiences.
The use of natural resources in the community could be identified as follows: Page 24 of 65
1. The use of resources to build and repair people's residences.
2. The cutting of trees and clearing of land to convert into crop production sites.
3. The collection of non-wood forest products for household consumption and a source of income, such as bark of Lan oak and Persia tree, mushrooms, bamboo shoots, ornamental plants etc.
4. Commercial timber trading (processed trees).
II. Problem-solving process through natural resource management (NRM) by the network
1. Village's past experiences
The villagers in Tambon Pang Ma Pha used to have a set of rules and regulations regarding watershed forest conservation in Mae Lana during the time of the first Kamnan (chief of the Tambon), Mr. Prayoon. Later, when the Tambon chief changed, these rules began to disappear. The villagers did not have the opportunity to experience finding solutions to problems through networking that involved natural resources in the community. However, they once held a meeting to try and solve a land conflict in the Mae Lana watershed area between two villages, Ya Pa Nae and Mae Lana. A Tambon forum held in 1991, (2) attempted to rectify that problem, but it was unsuccessful and the conflict remains to this day.
2. Present NRM through the network organization
Actual implementation by the TG-HDP is based on the guidelines of Community-based Land Use Planning and Local Watershed Management (CLM), which were tested in Nam Lang watershed from 1989. In Tambon Pang Ma Pha, the initial implementation of CLM was conducted in 4 villages, Ban Luk Khao Lum, Ban Pang Kam Noi, Ban Pha Charoen and Ban Ya Pa Nae. In 1994, an additional 3 villages, Ban Bo Krai, Ban Ja Bo and Ban Huai Hea also became involved.
In the past, however, there was no implementation of the concept of network organization because it emphasized its basics at community level.
During late 1994, the TG-HDP conducted a study on the use of non-wood forest products. Results showed that in Nam Lang basin area, many kinds were found, ranging from edible to those that provided an income for the villagers. Some products were used intensively, while others were marketed. Members of the study team provided recommendations and guidelines for the development of these forest products by initially trying to improve the peoples' forest management system and their skills in carrying out post harvest production. Only after that did the TG-HDP implement the practice based on results of the previous study.
The evolution of natural resource management by the network organization in T. Pang Ma Pha
1. Point of Inception
Conduct forum for analysis of the situation on "bamboo shoots and non-wood forest products Analyze and search for interested groups"
2. Started of joint understanding
Discover interested groups Create forum for exchange of ideas Begin awareness/consciousness of joint benefits Identify resources boundaries Start to from regulations
3. Initiation of networking
Meet for exchange of experiences among villages Possess joint NRM rules Assist each other Solve common problems of the group jointly
4. A more defined network
Network for solving existing problems Form an administrative structure Page 25 of 65
Possess joint regulations Increase network members Coordinate with external agencies and between villagers Develop leadership and skills Search for source of funds Plan
5. Impact
Adjust the administrative structure Increase the role and function/task Link with TAO (Tambon Administrative Organization) and other network/organizations Set-up targets for problem-solving: natural resources and the environment drug addiction culture education + accommodation
1. Point of Inception/Origin
All information and resulting data from the study: "survey on the use of forest products and their development potentials" were delivered by the working staff of the TG-HDP to the community (feed back process). This allowed the latter to focus on the overall situation regarding their use of non-forest products in Pang Ma Pha area, and assess the village user groups in each community. Based on this analysis, it was found that most of the users were generally the villagers themselves and forest products, especially rattan and several vegetable crops, were used mostly for household consumption. However, some items, which were intentionally removed from the forest and later sold, became a major source of additional income for the family. These products included mushrooms, bamboo shoots, and orchids. As a majority of the people handling these items were usually poor, the project considered them as its main target population.
2. Commencement of joint understanding
The villagers of Ban Luk Khao Lum, Ban Bor Krai and Ban Jabo, situated close to the main Pai-Mae Hong Son road, collected forest products as a source of additional income. Mostly bamboo shoots, mushrooms, and ornamental plants were gathered. Discussions with the people revealed that each village had its own distinct collection methods. Products were heaped from either similar forest sites or, in some cases, areas that overlapped with other villages. Further talks about these methods never took place, thus, presenting a freedom whereby the villagers could take as much as possible. There were no rules and regulations and some products were collected intensively. The villagers could not usually sell all that they gathered and often threw excess amounts to waste. Some villagers contacted private buyers who arrived in large trucks to buy the entire village supply. Consequently, this made the collection of forest trucks to buy the entire village supply. Consequently, this made the collection of forest products such as bamboo shoots, extremely competitive among the villagers products such as bamboo shoots, extremely competitive among the villagers.
The first forum for the group of forest product collectors, was held at Ban. The first forum for the group of forest product collectors, was held at Ban Luk Khao Lum village in July 1996. During this meeting, one resource person from the Luk Khao Lum village in July 1996. During this meeting, one resource person from the Division of Forest Product Research and Development of the Royal Forestry Department Division of Forest Product Research and Development of the Royal Forestry Department (RFD), Mr. Prachern Sroythongkham and Mr. Yanyong Kangkarn, were invited to (RFD), Mr. Prachern Sroythongkham and Mr. Yanyong Kangkarn, were invited to convey their knowledge and provide recommendations to the villagers on the proper convey their knowledge and provide recommendations to the villagers on the proper methods for collecting forest products and sustainable product management. After these talks and discussions the villagers from all three villages became deeply aware of the situation and agreed to have a sustainable and proper management of forest product collection. The villagers then began to hold negotiations among themselves regarding the agreement of rules and regulations, guidelines in collecting forest products, and the identification of forest sections in each village where product collection could be carried out. Discussions on the latter topic was facilitated by the use of topographic models during each meeting.
3. Initiation of networking (Bamboo shoot group network)
After the first forum, the villagers participated in setting up rules and regulations on the collection of forest products. However, this initiative was only directed towards certain villagers who collected products from the forest. In order that this particular set of rules and regulations could become more effective, the scope, in terms of village participation, should become wider or geared to the community. A representative of the group of forest product collectors then presented these rules etc. to other members of his own community for further discussions. This was an opportunity for other villagers to express their opinions and accept the agreement. As a result, members of this particular group decided to begin holding monthly forums, which would include discussions about other things. During each meeting, every group was represented by a family member. A core of 6-8 villagers was usually present during the meeting and the venue was rotated among the member's homes. This also presented the opportunity for group members (initial group network) to discuss the rules and regulations among themselves and other members of the community. To summarize, every meeting served as a forum for members to exchange their experiences with others in the network and provide assistance or solutions to the problems of the group. Members were also Page 26 of 65
able to exchange their knowledge and experience with each other.
4. A mote defined network
After the three villages had formed the group that was specific to the management of their community forest (the area where forest products were collected), the results of implementation spread to other villages, particularly in nearby areas. The people from these regions expressed their interest in participating as network members thus, broadening the scope of membership. As a consequence, the forest area, which needed to be managed, became wider. The scope of problems included not only the collection of forest products, but also conflicts in land use, forest encroachment in watershed areas, animal raising and those arising from the territorial boundaries of the villages and identification of Watershed forest/farming areas. At present, there are 19 villages comprising the network and the trend shows increasing membership in the future.
As the network grew larger, the working efficiency decreased. The villagers discussed this situation and agreed to set-up a working committee that could administer the implementation of the network more effectively and responsively. The committee comprised a network leader, secretary and a representative from each village. The aim of this committee was to allow it to serve as a representative of the network and act as an authorized body during cases of conflict in the use of natural resources. Through this committee, the network could become more acceptable to other organizations such as those from the government, NGOs and especially the Tambon Administrative Organization (TAO). This would enable them to plan and develop the natural resources in the target areas and represent the network during coordination with other agencies. Therefore, helping to obtain better cooperation and funding to support those activities being implemented.
5. Impact
Results from the implementation of the network organization on NRM, among the hilltribes of T. Pang Ma Pha, revealed the following impacts:
1. Solutions to problems concerning conflicts, such as the identification of village boundaries for farming areas, watershed forest etc., were made clearer with the participation of the villagers.
2. Rules and regulations on the management of natural resources were created.
3. Network planning for NRM was established.
4. NRM made an impact on the TAO forum, who were stimulated into recommending the network to the TAO. The TAO were then encouraged to act as a sub committee in the management of their own natural resources and environment.
5. Working together as a network on NRM, and allowing it to realize how work was being implemented in this situation, enabled farmers to focus on the benefits and advantages of this methodology. The network was also given the opportunity to expand its objectives or broaden its scope, which at present, include the objective of solving the following 4 problem areas:
natural resources and the environment problem of drug addiction conservation of hilltribe cultures and traditions support of education and accommodation for students
Currently, the network organization for NRM is larger and it has changed its name to "Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network". This organization has formed a clearer structure under the administrative section of NRM.
III. Summary of the implementation of the Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network on NRM
The Pang Ma Pha Hilltribe Network originated from three Black Lahu villages, namely:
Ban Luk Khao Lum Ban Bor Krai Ban Jabo
It started by grouping together a few villagers in the community who wanted to solve the problems involving the management of forest products, especially bamboo shoots. It then expanded by including people from other neighborhoods. A forum has been formed where people can exchange their ideas. It is held monthly and hosted at every village in rotation. In each forum, the network tries to emphasize on solving problems regarding conflicts on land use and natural resources, or any particular problem that directly affects the member(s) and/or network. A great deal of discussion takes place during every forum until the villagers are clear about a situation or able to reach an understanding. The meeting concludes with an agreement in order to prevent any conflict recurring. As in the case of the forest encroachment in Mae Lana watershed by the villagers from Ban Huai Hea, the forum agreed that those who encroached the area would only be allowed to cultivate it until 1997. After that, they could plant fruit trees in the region, but those villagers found guilty of encroachment or cutting trees would be fined 500 Baht/tree. This method was accepted by the villagers. There have been other similar cases such as the land use conflict on the boundary between Ban Mai Hung and Ban Pha Puek; forest encroachment in Lam Huai Mae Lana watershed area by villagers from Ban Ya Pa Nae; and the forest encroachment of Pra Pa watershed by villagers from Ban Ja Bo and Ban Mae Page 27 of 65
Lana etc.
Apart from this forum, network members also participate in the identification of each village boundary. They may also facilitate the clear recognition of their own areas of maintenance and responsibility; watershed forest; boundaries of cultivation areas; and other kinds of problems, which involves the role of the network in providing assistance and solutions to its members. Due to this organization, the villagers are able to learn and discuss their experiences together.
The following are major activities that the network have implemented:
1. Identification of each village boundary for the members' information.
2. Participation in the establishment of boundaries indicated for watershed forest, cultivation and animal raising areas, multi- purpose forest etc.
3. Maintenance of the watershed forest and prevention of forest fire by means of a firebreak and establishing regulations.
4. Replanting trees or reforestation in Ban Bo Krai watershed forest.
5. Surveying Huai Mae Lana watershed forest and monitoring its land use annually with the monitoring/follow-up system through channels: 1) direct monitoring through each network member during monthly meetings and 2) through the TAO meeting.
6. Solving land use conflicts such as those between Ban Mai Hung and Ban Pha Puek; Ban Pha Puek and Ban Huai Hea; Ban Huai Hea and Ban Mae Lana etc.
7. Establishment of rules and regulations regarding the use of natural resources and forest products in Tambon Pang Ma Pha, which include: no cutting of trees in watershed forest, which carries a fine for violators of 500 Baht/tree; no collection of orchids from the forest for trading; no cutting of trees without permission from the committee responsible for forest maintenance, especially in multi-purpose forest etc.
8. Establishment of plans for the management of natural resources by the network for 1998, which includes activities such as :
8.1 Solving the problem regarding land use conflicts between the villages of Ban Pha Puek and Ban Huai Hea.
8.2 Holding a forum to solve the conflict in animal raising between Ban Huai Hea, Ban Ya Pa Nae and Ban Pha Puek.
8.3 Providing assistance to network villages in identifying community resources distinctly.
8.4 Releasing public information and creating an understanding for the network community regarding the sustainable management of natural resources with the participation, awareness and consciousness of the community.
8.5 Supporting the construction of models for other member villages who are without.
8.6 Conducting forums for the group in Pong watershed, Tambon Na Pu Porn with other villages, so as they may exchange experiences, including those related to dissemination.
8.7 Conducting study trips to increase the peoples' knowledge and allowing them to exchange experiences with various organizations in other villages.
The network has also participated in the establishment of detailed guidelines and working stages for each of the 8 major activities previously mentioned. This indicates that the network has become aware of the problems regarding their natural resources, which deteriorate daily. The network has also become confident of its realistic intentions and capabilities in carrying out the management of its natural resources. In future, the network will also conduct a monthly review and evaluation of its implementation to allow adjustment of the working process and methodology. This will enable it to solve problems precisely.
In summary, the NRM section of Pang Ma Pha Hilltibe Network has a target of, "allowing all network members in every household in Pang Ma Pha district to have good understanding of the participatory system of NRM. In each community, there would be a clear identification of every part or type of natural resource in order to manage them conveniently and properly. Every community would have its own rules and regulations on the practical use and management of their resources, as accepted by each member, with consideration given to the rights of each individual. Finally, their would be acceptance of the network by government agencies and other organizations."
The results of working together for the network has enabled its members to be more aware. They have gained more confidence and capability towards the management of natural resources in their local community.
IV. Lessons learned Page 28 of 65
1. When a network starts from a small group of interested members, who have roughly the same benefits and similar problems, its implementation becomes more convenient and effective, thus, enabling it to function well. There is usually a good understanding and deep awareness among network members in the need to solve problems together, therefore, allowing the network to find solutions of a higher and wider scope than those at community level.
2. In solving the problems of the community, a network committee should serve as a mediator or referee to stimulate discussions during the bargaining process of various conflicts.
3. The problems regarding natural resources are serious. They require strength and participation from various sectors of the community in order to attain the best solutions.
4. In solving the problems of various conflicts, the people's forum should arrange:
a network meeting held prior to the forum an inspection of the area in question with a written record of any agreement kept as evidence, and witnessed by a government representative who is present during the forum and responsible for the particular case an occasional bargaining process, conducted in a friendly manner, for more understanding between two parties.
5. A village model is considered an effective tool in promoting the discussion process among villagers and solving the problems arising from conflicts in the use of natural resources. The model also helps to create an understanding among network members or between them and government officers. This enables the bargaining process to take place easily and fairly. During the latest meeting, many network members from various villages requested the construction of their own village models for use in future activities. Among those villages involved were Ban Pha Puek, Ban Mai Hung and Ban Pha Daeng.
6. The identification of village boundaries and the community's natural resources, where sections are comprised of farming/cultivation areas, watershed forest, animal raising /grazing areas etc., allows the villagers a clearer understanding of the attributes of NRM. It helps them to develop a deep sense of ownership and conscious awareness of their participation in conservation. However, in identifying these boundaries and natural resources, the villagers should prioritize the food source area (cultivation/farming) rather than regard it as one for administration.
7. The conservation or management of natural resources (forest) should be carried out in parallel with the development of the agricultural system. This is because the two things are related without a clear line separating them. This is evident in the case of paddy field expansion in Ban Huai Hea, where there is a need for the villagers to conserve or protect the watershed area in order to have a source of water for paddy rice. When the development of intensive land takes place, the subsequent impact to the animal raising system must be considered. Therefore, there is also a need for appropriate management of the livestock system.
V. Recommendations
1. The network organization should register itself legally so that it may request and obtain financial support conveniently for future activity implementation from various government agencies and NGOs.
2. The network organization should monitor its village members closely in the control/maintenance or use of agricultural land around the watershed area, which should be more efficient and produce less impact.
3. To provide impact at policy level, the network should seek cooperation from other organizations such as the Assembly of Poor Farmers and other small farmer groups in the northern region. They might contribute and integrate their experiences for the formulation of future policy development that will aim to produce a real and practical impact on participatory NRM by the community and, in particular, the Community Forest Act.
Natural Resource Management by Tambon Council
A Case Study of Tambon Tham Lod, Pang Ma Pha District,
Mae Hong Son Province
by Prasong Jantakad
I. Background
Tambon Tham Lod is located nine kilometers northeast of Pang Ma Pha District. It was recognized legally as an official organization in 1995 and it comprises 7 villages as follows: Page 29 of 65
1. Tham Lod
2. Aea Ko
3. Wana Luang
4. Pha Mon
5. Muang Pham
6. Huai Hang
7. Aea La
There are also two satellite villages:
1. San Kam Lue (satellite of Aea Ko village)
2. Hua Lang (satellite of Huai Hang village)
The target population of 1,960 in total consists of 3 main tribes; Red Lahu, Shan and Karen. They occupy a total area of 216 square kilometers or approximately 135,000 rai.
1. Area settlement
The target villages of Tambon Tham Lod are scattered among the. mountains and upper watershed areas such as Nam Lang and Nam Pham, which are the two most important. A majority of the villages in this Tambon have been declared just recently as key one of permanent settlement areas. They are, on average, between 13-15 years old, except for Ban Tham Lod, Ban Muang Pham and Ban San Kam Lue, which date back aground 100 years. In the past, most villagers, particularly the Lahu tribes of Huai Hang, Huai Lang, Pha Mon, Aea La and Aea Ko, were nomadic because their cropping system was based mainly on opium cultivation. When soil fertility became low and crop yields decreased, they moved to other areas where soil fertility was higher. This practice was continued until the Thai-German Highland Development Programme (TG-HDP) became involved in community development, which coincided with the villages being declared as permanent settlements. Thus, village movement ceased.
2. Production system
The past production system of Tambon Tham Lod was based mainly on subsistence crop production with paddy (Shan and Karen) and upland rice (Lahu) as a main crop, and opium as a cash crop. Arable land was located in the highlands along the watershed area of Nam Lang and Nam Pham and the villages there had an extensive livestock system raising cattle, buffalo, pigs, and chickens. Muang Pham, Tham Lod and Aea Ko also grew paddy rice, while the rest produced the upland variety. However, the production system changed, particularly for villages that are accessible from the main road (Tham Lod, Wana Luang, and Huai Hang). These villages have started to grow cash crops such as bean, ginger, taro and others.
3. Resource situation
The forest resources in Tham Tham Lod could be classified into three sections:
1. Area occupied by the Pai Wildlife Sanctuary, which is located in the east and south, covering Ban Wana Luang, Pha Mon and some parts of Ban Tham Lod.
2. Area covered by the Tham Lod forest park, which is located in the eastern part of Ban Tham Lod.
3. Area comprising the national forest reserve located in northern and western parts covering some sections of Ban Tham Lod, Huai Hang, Huai Lang, Aea Ko, Sam Kam Lue and Muang Pham.
The forest resource of Tambon Tham Lod is utilized rather extensively by the villagers themselves, since their production system is not permanent land use or cropping. The two major water resources of Nam Lang (Lang river) and Nam Pham (Pham river) serve as a lifeline for the people of Tambon Tham Lod. Regarding the issue of natural resource management (NRM), there seems to be no distinct organization responsible. However, there has been management at village level in, for example, Ban Huai Hang, Aea Ko and Muang Pham, as these villages have been included as target sites for the highland community forest programme under the responsibility of the Watershed Management Unit #5031 of the Royal Forestry Department.
Villagers have also been seen to utilized resources in an unsuitable way with practices that included illegal logging, timber cutting and commercial trading of forest products e.g. tree bark.
Page 30 of 65
II. Problem -Solving Process through the Community and Tambon Council on Natural Resource Management (NRM)
1. Villagers' past experience
It could be stated that previously, the Tambon Council (TC) of Tambon Tham Lod took a major role in NRM at Tambon level. However, some villages such as Ban Muang Pham, Huai Hang and Aea Ko have gained some experience in NRM because they have been included in the highland community forest project of the RFD as target villages. These villages have constructed models, undergone some training, participated in field studies etc. The village committees of these villages could be presumed as strong supporters of NRM in Tambon Tham Lod.
2. NRM through the Tambon Council (TC)
The TG-HDP began to take an interest in working with the TC because of the government's policy involving a decentralization that would focus on local organization. In this policy, the Tambon Council would be upgraded to become a legal organization in order to develop the Tambon, particularly in its planning and budget. This change would enable the TC to have more authority in decision-making regarding village development and problem solving. The TG-HDP has realize that the TC is an important local organization that could respond to all the problems of the people at Tambon level and support development activities of the community in the village. This implementation guideline is in response to the decentralization policy of the TG- HDP, which has emphasized on strengthening the capabilities of the people at village and Tambon levels in order that they attain self-reliance in the future.
Therefore, during the TG-HDP's last two years of field implementation (1997 and 1998), it incorporated development plans with the Tambon organization. It emphasized on strengthening the capability of the TC in its new role as a legal organization, with the ability for the self -management of appropriate and effective development activities in order to comply with the decentralization of the government.
Objective
To develop and strengthen the capability of the TC to enable the implementation of effective development work according to its new role of Tambon organization.
Working Concept
The Tambon organization, according to its new role or responsibility, would be more capable in solving various village problems and implementing development activities in the Tambon.
Under this presumption, the Tambon organization would need to improve in the following:
the ability and skill in solving problems of the community the ability and skill in management the attainment of knowledge and clear understanding of their new role the willingness to make sacrifices for and have awareness of the people in their community the ability to manage and solve problems in the community at village level
Expected outcome
1. The Tambon organization has the knowledge, skill ad ability to implement their work according to their new role or responsibility.
2. The Tambon organization has the awareness to provide assistance to each member in solving social, economic, political, administrative, and natural resource and environmental problems.
3. The Tambon organization has the ability to manage the personnel and budget efficiently.
The Mandate of the Tambon Organization (New Role)
according to the bill of rights of the Tambon Council and
Tambon Administrative Organization 1994
1. Develop the Tambon in accordance with the project planning and budget of the Tambon Council.
2. Provide advice to government agencies regarding the administration and development of the Tambon. Page 31 of 65
3. Carry out assigned tasks in compliance with local and other laws in relation to their implementation by the Tambon on the following issues:
3.1 Provide water for consumption and agricultural purposes.
3.2 Provide maintenance for water and soil.
3.3 Provide maintenance for drainage, road cleanliness, water ways and other public places including control of garbage and waste.
3.4 Protect and maintain natural resources and the environment.
3.5 support and promote the occupation of the people.
3.6 Promote the development of women, children, youth, the aged and the handicapped.
The Working Process
1. Preparation
Establishment of guideline/working steps Consultations with leaders of the Tambon Council and representatives of government agencies concerned
2. Assessment of the capabilities of the Tambon Council
Conduct workshop Creation and agreement of expected outcome with TC Analysis of present situation potentials, and problems including knowledge of NRM
3. Establishment of development plan
Conduct meeting to identify the working guideline Creation of Tambon development plans
4. Implementation of activities
Organize training on NRM network Conduct workshop to identify village boundaries Establishment and agreement of rules Conduct study field trips Conduct tree planting for the rehabilitation of watershed areas
5. Summary of implementation
Conduct workshop to summarize experiences together Impact
1. Preparation
Initially, both project staff officers and members of the Tambon Council were prepared separately during August 1996 before eventually working together. For the TG-HDP project staff. their main responsibility was to create a draft of working guidelines and steps to strengthen the capability of the Tambon organization. This was carried out by coordinating with the people concerned at the Pang Ma Pha Sub-district Office (chief personnel) and the District Community Development Office, which is the supervising authority of the Tambon organization. The purpose of this coordination was to obtain feedback and suggestions regarding work implementation.
Project staff officers also coordinated with TC leaders, which included the chairman, assistant chairman and secretary for an initial discussion before working together.
2. Assessment of capabilities of the Tambon Council Page 32 of 65
After coordinating with the Tambon organization, an appointment was made for a meeting in order to assess their capabilities and identify the problems and constraints of the past implementation, Information regarding the strength of their existing capability is important in establishing both guidelines for future work in relation to this aspect and appropriate project implementation based on their specific situation. Assessment methods consisted of:
1. lecture and presentations
2. discussions
3. group work
4. setting-up of expected outcome.
The final assessment of the Tambon organization on NRM showed actual situations, as follows: The people lacked awareness of NRM conservation especially on soil, water and forest. The utilization of their land was complex and overlapped the area of other villages including encroachment of the watersheds. The village boundaries were not defined clearly/ The TC members had little understanding of NRM. The Tambon organization had some experience in discussion forums on NRM under the RFD's highland community forest village project, but there was no distinct field implementation. There was a conflict regarding the use of natural resources,. particularly the villagers' encroachment of the Pham watershed and Nam Lang watershed forest.
3. Establishment of the development plan
The different issues resulting from the second working stage were adapted to establish guidelines for solving problems. A meeting was conducted to establish these guidelines and discuss the implementation of activities, such as:
1. Construction of topographic model at Tambon level. 2. Identification of the boundaries of various resources such as conservation forest and land, multipurpose forest etc. including the conception of rules and regulations of each village. 3. Training on NRM. 4. Organization of study field trips. 5. Support of tree planting for the rehabilitation of the watershed. 6. Support of tree ordination for Nam Pham watershed forest. The establishment of these plans and guidelines involved a discussion on the division of work and corresponding responsibilities among the project officers of the TG-HDP and members of the Tambon organization. This included the projected schedule of activities, financial support involved, working steps and the consequent coordination with government agencies concerned.
4. Implementation of activities
This stage was the implementation of Step 1, with emphasis on the working process and coordination with government agencies concerned with effecting these activities. These agencies include the District Forestry Office, Watershed Management Unit #1053, Natural resource and Wildlife Study Centre, Pai Wildlife Sanctuary and others, while the activities implemented consisted of:
1. Construction of the 3 dimension topographic model at Tambon level. The budget for the purchase of construction materials and corresponding technical support were provided by the TG-HDP. The TC conducted the implementation in order to use it as a tool for the discussion and planning of the improvement process for NRM. 2. Two days training on NRM for the TC. This emphasized the provision of knowledge, as supported by the Watershed Management Unit. 3. Identification of the boundaries of resources such as the watershed conservation forest, NRM and the agricultural or cultivated land of each village. This model was used as a primary tool for the identification of these resources. These results were later included in the discussion process, held to set-up rules and regulations at village and Tambon level. Forestry officers from the District Office and the Natural Resource and Wildlife Study Centre also participated in this meeting. 4. Field trips to study environmental and NRM issues. A portion of the budget requirement was supported by the project, while the rest was provided by the Tambon organization. The main content of the study trip focused on natural resource and environmental management by the network organization at Tambon level. The locations were Chiang Rai, Phayao and Chiang Mai provinces. 5. Organization of tree planting activities to rehabilitate the watershed area of Nam Pham within Ban Aea La. The Tambon organization coordination with the District Forestry Office to request seedlings. In this activity, the Tambon organization became the key agency in planting about 4,500 seedlings. 6. Support of tree ordination activity in a 1,000 rai watershed area at Nam Pham. This activity incorporated both the tradition and culture of the people. 7. A workshop to review the rules and regulations for NRM with the purpose of adjusting them to align with both the Tambon and village.
5. Summary of implementation
Working together for more than a year caused an impact in several aspects to both the project staff officers and Tambon Page 33 of 65
organization or target population. It could be summarized as follows:
Working process
The mandate of the TG-HDP on this project was to serve as the facilitator and coordinator, to contribute budget support (for some internal activities) and provide the necessary technical assistance. The working process could be summarized as follows:
1. Internal preparation
Project staff officers
2. Preparation with Tambon Council
Content Technique, methods Division of responsibilities Others
3. Implementation
Tambon council served as the key agency The TG-HDP served as the facilitator and coordinator
4. Monitoring by TC at Tambon and village levels
Project encouragement to cause real impact of its implementation
Impact of the implementation of activities
In the past, the TG-HDP and TC implemented 7 activities jointly (as previously mentioned), which caused direct and indirect impact on TC members and the community organization.
TC members were given the opportunity to join the forum and identify the circumstances of NRM in the Tambon, and also, establish guidelines for solving problems using a model as a tool to provide them with an overview of the whole situation.
During the construction of the model, TC members had shown their participation and cooperation. Moreover, 3 or 4 were found to have the knowledge and skill in constructing the model and they provided great assistance in engineering its completion.
TC members exercised their conscience and awareness on NRM by conducting the tree ordination activity comprising 1,000 rai, and also, the tree planting activity in a 300 rai area at Ban Aea La.
Therefore, TC members had been a great help to the people of the target villages, particularly in identifying the boundaries of the community resources as distinctly as possible. This included cultivated land, animal grazing areas, watershed and multipurpose forest, forest product collection area etc.
The identification of these resources in each area enabled the TC members to attain more understanding of the situation. They discovered where each type of resource was located, their specific area size and how they could be used better by the people. Questions were raised on how these areas should be conserved and how they could be managed effectively.
All rules and regulations on NRM created by each village were integrated to form the regulations at Tambon level. It also became a basis of agreement for the practice of the TC in Tambon Tham Lod. TC members also participated in the assessment of NRM for each village community to measure its ability to understand. This was indicated later in a ranking system, as follows:
Village # 1 (outstanding) = Ban Muang Pham
Village #2 = Ban Tham Lod
Village #3 = Ban Huai Hang, Aea Ko, Wana Luang, Pha Mon, Aea La
From this ranking, TC members were able to see the whole picture and project how they were going to work in the future. This data made it a priority to assist those villages ranked #3 to improve their NRM. Page 34 of 65
Example
The regulations for NRM at Tambon level in Tambon Tham Lod, Pang Ma Pha District, Mae Hong Son Province
1. Cutting trees in the watershed forest is definitely not allowed. 2. The individual responsible must make firebreak protection before burning their field. 3. The village committee must grant permission before using trees from the multipurpose forest. 4. Trees are not allowed to be cut for commercial sales to any outsider (non-Tambon members). However, a Tambon member can seek permission from the village committee to sell to outsiders. 5. The area intended for cultivation must not be extended into the fertile forest or the new forest. 6. Materials that contain poisonous substances, electricity and /or bombs, are not allowed for use in fishing. 7. All machines and saws are not allowed for use during tree cutting in the forest, except with permission from the village committee and TC. Consideration of this request rests on the purpose of using such equipment in relation to the community.
Punishment
1. Those breaking the rules governing the cutting of trees in the watershed area will be arrested. 2. Should the absence of firebreak protection cause widespread damage, the individual responsible for providing the said protection will be liable to pay compensation costs to all those affected. 3. Those found cutting trees to sell will be arrested by the TC and fined according to the value of the trees. This money will be added to the Tambon funds. 4. Those found encroaching on fertile forest for cultivation will be fined 300 Baht and forbidden to use that land. 5. Those found using poison, electricity, and/or bombs for fishing will fined 300-500 Baht. This money will be placed in Tambon funds.
III. Lessons Learned
By working together for the past year, the Tambon organization of Tambon Tham Lod and TG-HDP project officers were able exchange ideas experiences. They can be summarized as follows:
1. Although the project itself has clearly formed a process and strategy for developing the capability of the Tambon organization on NRM, and the TC has the mandate to manage natural resources, there are still limitations in practice, particularly on issues concerning the management of conservation forest (wildlife sanctuaries, forest parks etc.). Nevertheless, there has been full support for the community organization from the TC and, in some cases, from those at village level.
2. In the integrated use of traditions and cultural practices in natural resource conservation, related activities such as tree ordination could provide a clear impact on the organization.
3. By providing an opportunity for the TC to implement activities, confidence and a learning process were created among TC members.
4. The implementation of activities, according to the working process, required sufficient time in order to cause impact at village level.
5. Although TC members have acquired sufficient capability and confidence for NRM within the Tambon at certain levels, some situations might require more. For example, dealing with an influential of high-ranking government officer involved in the illegal trading of forest wood.
6. The ability for a Tambon to share resources, while situated in the same watershed area as others, has indicated better management.
IV. Suggestions
1. To create a real impact with the practice of NRM at village level, the TC should provide support and develop members of the community towards better management, like those in villages #l and #2. In turn, it would enable them to assist and participate in dissemination to other villages of lower ranking. Page 35 of 65
2. The TC should develop a monitoring system for NRM issues such as holding monthly mobile meetings. At the same time, they should be able to provide knowledge to the members of the community in target villages.
3. More opportunities should be created for the TC to enable it to implement further activities by itself, while encouraging the learning process at the same time. This way, more lessons would be learned for the improvement of work in the future.
4. The TC organization should provide more support to its own members. This would enable them to become more involved with campaign and dissemination activities regarding NRM at village level, in relation to the working process at Tambon level.
Community-Based Land Use Planning and Natural Resource Management
A Case Study of Natural Resource Management of Karen Ethnic Group
Tambon Huai Poo Ling, Muang District, Mae Hong Son Province
by Tawatchai Rattanasorn
I. Background
1. General information
Huai Poo Ling is a Tambon populated by the Karen Ethnic Group and located in the Muang district of Mae Hong Son province. It occupies a total area of 350,000 rai (approximately 560 sq. km), of which about one-third belongs to the National Forest Park. Huai Poo Ling is about 94 km from the city of Mae Hong Son and accessed by a small road that passes through Ban Hua Nam Mae Sakud. It continues on towards Ban Wad Jan (Mae Jaem district, Chiang Mai province). At present, the Office of Rural Reconstruction Development is building a new road from Ban Hua Nam Mae Sa-kud to Huai Poo Ling and approximately 35 km has been constructed already.
There are 30 small wooden bridges, which cross streams between Ban Hua Nam Mae Sa-kud and Ban Wad Jan. During the dry season, an ordinary car can pass through this road, but only vehicles equipped with four-wheel drive cope with conditions in the rainy season. However, most villagers prefer to walk.
This area is situated 300 - 1,700 m above sea level and comprises a steep mountainous terrain with very little level ground. Several small streams feed the region, which is mainly fertile forest with only 15 per cent being cultivated.
The average annual rainfall is 1,260 mm (average volume during the past 20 years) as calculated by the Mae Hong Son Provincial Meteorological Station.
rainy season June to October
cold season November to February
hot season March to May
The average temperature is 24.4 oC, the lowest being 6 oC in January and the highest 38 oC during April.
The total population of Tambon Huai Poo Ling (about 3,700) belongs purely to the Karen Hilltribe (Karen Skor) with a density of roughly 5 people per km. The villagers earn their living from crop cultivation and raising livestock. There are 450 households in 11 key and 22 satellite villages, with an average of 20 households per village. Three villages contain more than 30 households and only one has over 80. Almost the entire population has personal registered identities and possess house registration cards. Some 2 out of 3 villagers are Christian and the rest, Buddhist. There is no opium cultivation in the neighbourhood, but some villagers work as hired labour at poppy farms in other areas.
2. Agricultural and production systems
In Tambon Huai Poo Ling, agricultural crop production is considered an important system, particularly in rice, since it is used primarily for household consumption. About 95 per cent of the population cultivate upland rice (whether they have paddy areas or not) mainly because it provides for both consumption and a source of alternative crops. The farming system is basically a "fallow rotation system" where field cultivation is carried out for a whole year and then re-cultivated after 8-10 years. The average rice production is about 250 kg per rai, although actual production varies greatly depending on some significant factors such as the amount of rainfall, soil fertility, planting methods, maintenance and climate.
Livestock production is also considered an important aspect for the villagers. Three out of four households raise their own cattle and buffaloes. However, major factors limit animal husbandry such as investment capital and the knowledge and capability to manage and maintain animal health. This includes the ability to make decisions in an intensive system, which Page 36 of 65
makes animal production in the area rather low. Nevertheless, almost all households raise chickens and pigs. The villagers feed the pigs twice daily, while cattle and buffaloes are allowed to graze freely in the forest, with attention being paid to them only when they are sick or give birth.
Cash crops are generally less important to the villagers than subsistence crops and livestock production. Ban Huai Tong, Ban Huai Poo Loei and Ban Huai Hee grow cash crops including taro, red kidney bean, coffee, garlic, ginger and vegetables. The major problem of cash crop production is marketing because of the difficulty in transportation. However, trading in the area occurs, especially in rice, but the major source of income is made from selling animals e.g. cattle, buffaloes etc., which suggests that livestock production is considered the most essential.
The Karen Ethnic Group has been living in the mountains of northern Thailand and along the country's borders with Myanmar (Burma) for more than 700 years. About 52% of all hilltribe populations found in the highlands are Karen. The most important principle in their life is to harmonize with nature and recognize their dependence on each other. This forms the foundation of their beliefs and cultural systems (Kwanchewan & Manfred, 1994). The Karen people believe that they are experts in paddy cultivation and small-scale irrigation systems. They select flat areas of land found between valleys, with flowing streams that provide for the development and building of irrigation systems for paddy rice farms. These are generally seen in Karen villages. However, since there is potential in the area for paddy fields, Karen farmers developed an upland rice system, which has been accepted by agricultural technocrats as a subsistence-sustainable fallow rotation system that has bio-diversity and agro-eco systemic characteristics.
In one upland rice field, there is a mixture of more than 30 different kinds of crops including over 10 varieties of rice. The Karen also have very strong cultural practices when maintaining and using sustainable forest resources, These are seen commonly in their villages. This group of people have their own rules and regulations intended for the conservation of various land resources such as watershed and conservation forest, and fallow fields or land cultivated in the community.
However, rapid changes to the socio-economic structure of the country and the world as a whole may soon have effects on various systems. There must be the need to analyze strengths and weaknesses to determine appropriate alternatives or solutions in order to make corrections, create a balance and attain a more sustainable development.
3. The situation of natural resources
It can be said that the forest resources in Huai Poo Ling are the most fertile in Mae Hong Son province. Many of the villagers have lived in this Tambon for most of their lives. They have relied on the forest as a source of food, farming rice and animals, and they have used its wood for building temporary houses.
Over the past 30 years, every village has stopped migration. Contact with the outside world has improved with better communications, and commercial production has increased its role in the daily lives of the villagers.
However, each village has maintained its own traditional way of life, particularly with regard to the cultural practices involved in conservation and the management of natural resources. The people of every village have clearly identified or categorized important areas as watershed forest and paddy rice fields. Every year, the villagers agree on the selection of these areas. Apart from this, the rotational fallow system has helped the region to recover its fertile situation rapidly and improve its quality. These practices have helped to maintain high fertility and bio-diversity.
The main apprehension and concern of the community and development agents from both government and private sectors are the strong and rapid social and economic changes that have caused an impact in altering the current cultural structure of the community. Thus, destroying various systems that maintain the existence of forest and other natural resources. For example, cash crop production or cultivation of commercial fruit trees contribute to changes in the land tenure system, which shift the rights of the community to individuals. When people cut trees in the past, they used the simple saw instead of today's modem methods. The illegal practice of cutting trees and other forest products, which provides economic gain for village outsiders, is a worry to those concerned. However, there are measures that should be taken to counteract this situation.
II. Concept and implementation process for community based natural resource management of the Thai-German Highland Development Programme
1. Concept
The concept of community based natural resource management, used by the Thai-German Highland Development Programme (TG-HDP), is described in Section 2 of this document. The evolution of this concept has been greatly assisted by concrete examples of indigenous and modified natural resource management (NRM), particularly in Karen communities. Various development agencies and their staff, who have observed or been involved in such examples, have seen the clear benefits which result from using a participatory development process such as community based land use planning and local watershed management (CLM). They believe that implementation using such processes can deal with the increasingly serious problems related to NRM in the country as a whole and the highland areas in particular.
2. The implementing process related to the strengthening of the organization on natural resource management (NRM)
The concept in Tambon Huai Poo Ling has been implemented since 1991, with the selection of only one test-run village, Ban Huai Poo Loei. When considering the development of the concept on NRM by the community organization in this village, the Page 37 of 65
implementing process could be summarized as follows:
1991
Selection of the test-run village. Formation of a land use planning team which included various government agencies e.g. land development agency, public welfare, royal forestry, livestock station, district office, TG-HDP etc. Work in the community as a team, which organized a village discussion forum with the participation of villagers and community leaders who determined the guidelines and concept for land use planning. This enabled them to understand the boundaries of the resources in the village by using the topographic model as a communication tool.
1992
Participation with the villagers in identifying the areas of land use, forest, residence etc., based on the existing community management system. Support of development activities in various fields such as the increase in the number of planted trees, improved soil fertility in the village watershed area, better animal raising, development of cultivation areas that had a better irrigation system, improved crop cultivation and an increase in the potential of paddy fields.
1993
Support and encouragement for the community in reviewing their rules and regulations regarding the maintenance and management of the area; carried out by organizing and participating in activities such as study tours. This included a discussion forum to provide an opportunity for villagers to exchange their ideas and experiences with other communities.
1994-1997
Expansion of implementing areas into 4 groups of 12 villages: Group 1 Ban Huai Tong Ko, Ban Mai, Ban Pa Mak, Ban Huai Mai Dam Group 2 Ban Huai Tong, Ban Huai Poo Loei Group 3 Ban Nong Khao Klang, Ban Huai Hee, Ban Nong Khao Neua Group 4 Ban Huai Porn Phad, Ban Pa Ka and Huai Kluai The expansion of the above-mentioned implementing areas was started by activities that emphasized on the strengthening of the learning process, and inviting specialists or experts (such as Por Luang Jomi) to discuss and exchange ideas with the people in the community. Study tours were put into practice and organized for villagers to visit natural areas suffering from destruction and other problems. Visits to successful areas possessing NRM were also arranged by the community organization. Cooperation between the team of project staff and rural development offices with other agencies involved to implement various activities as follows:
Strategy Implementation
Strengthening the capability of Review of the rules/regulations, cultures and traditions the community on natural of the community in relation to conservation and resource management management of natural
Planning for land use, Search/ development of appropriate alternative improvement of the agricultural technology for the future production system to be
appropriate and in support of off- Support of paddy field improvement and expansion farm activity as a supplemental source of income Promotion of efficient land use
Support of off-farm activities e.g. weaving, handicraft etc.
Building/development of group and group leadership to be prepared for future changes
Increase in the capability and Development of leadership, ideology and a promotion of leadership role management system for implementation at network level between villages and the Tambon organization Linkage of tasks in resource management at Tambon level in the Tambon administrative organization Page 38 of 65
3. Support the role of the network organization by implementing Strategy Implementation Guideline
1. Group one:
Huai Porn Phad, Ban Pa Ka, and Ban Huai Kluai which have implemented the following activities: Joint protection of watershed forest including the establishment of rules and regulations on the use and conservation of land, water and forest resources. Participation in the protection of forest fires. Conservation of wildlife and aquatic animals. Establishment of regulations for the collection of forest products. Establishment of regulations for the land use of agriculture, identification of demarcation/boundary lines for each type/category of resource, and control/ protection of forest fires caused by field burning. A village forum for the exchange of ideas and experiences in participatory NRM and regular monitoring of critical situations. Study tours in order to increase knowledge and opinion on NRM in a sustainable way. Participation in the tree ordination activity, which involved 50 million trees in 1997 to celebrate the 50th year celebration of H.M. The King's accession to the throne.
2. Group two:
Huai Mai Dam, Ban Mai, Ban Pa Mak and Ban Huai Tong Ko or the Huai Poo Ling network group, which have implemented the following activities:
A village forum to evaluate the situation related to the participatory management of land, water and forest. Initiation of meetings or a forum to follow up on the establishment of important solutions to problems including maintenance and the use of land, water and forest resources. These provide realistic examples such as the attempt to prevent fishing by using explosives, bait etc. Establishment of boundaries around conservation forest and cultivation areas..
3. Group three:
Ban Huai Hee, Ban Nong Khao Klang and Ban Nong Khao Neu which have implemented the following activities:
Regular meetings to establish rules and regulations on the conservation of watershed and multi-purpose forest among villages. Also, regulations on the collection of non-wood forest products such as rattan, palm leaf, herbs, wood for the home etc. Joint classification/categorization of various resources in a clear and distinct way, e.g. boundaries around the watershed conservation forest, and the agricultural area etc.
4. Group four:
Ban Huai Tong and Ban Huai Poo Loei which have implemented the following activities:
A forum to analyze the situations regarding the management of forest resources and include the participation of Ban Huai Nam Som and Ban Kaeng Horn, in order to solve and prevent conflicts and impact from the common use of resources.
III. Summary of Implementation
In the management of natural resources, several agencies have participated in taking responsibility in its implementation, namely: Royal Forestry Department (RFD), Department of Land Development (DLD), Department of Agricultural Extension (DOAE), Livestock Development Department (LDD), Department of Fisheries (DOF), Department of Community Development (DCD), Department of Local Administration (DLA) and Department of Public Welfare (DPW). In actual practice, the Thai- German Highland Development Programme (TG-HDP) served as the coordinator of all these agencies including the local organizations such as Tambon councils, village committees, community organizations and the target population.
1. Summary of current implementation:
1. Conduct a participatory learning process among the villager's project staff officers/development agents regarding the concept, model, NRM and community based land use planning with the target to be realized of "man can coexist with the forest in wisdom and sustainability". The following activities have already been implemented:
Construction of 8 topographic models covering 13 target villages:
Ban Huai Hee Ban Nong Khao Kland and Ban Nong Khao Neua Page 39 of 65
Ban Huai Porn Phad, Ban Pa Ka and Ban Huai Kluai Ban Huai Mai Dam Ban Mai and Ban Pa Mak Ban Huai Tong Ko and Ban Huai Moo Bon Ban Huai Poo Loei Ban Huai Tong.
At the moment, the topographic model for Tambon Huai Poo Ling is being constructed. Topographic models are used as reference tools to provide a better understanding and enable agreements to be reached on the concept and implementation guidelines of conservation, utilization and the management of community land, water and forest resources. They should be used in an increasingly sustainable manner in order to identify boundaries for cultivation areas; conservation, watersheds, and community multi-purpose forest; and the implementation of the agricultural system. Also, for improvement to the irrigation system for agriculture, and the community water supply system for home consumption; and to serve as a means of understanding with the agencies responsible, particularly, the Royal Forestry Department.
2. Development of knowledge and skills among leaders and other members of the community in relation to the group administration that is a basic foundation for participatory working, which in turn, affects the efficiency of the community organization's management of natural resources.
Study tours for group leaders and community representatives have been conducted continuously in order to broaden their minds and promote learning from experience. These tours provide a perfect opportunity to observe real situations and transfer the knowledge gamed regarding the benefits of implementation to members of the existing practice. Knowledgeable people, specialists and community representatives have been asked to join discussions to exchange ideas and relate their experiences in order to create more awareness for the villagers. This activity has been conducted several times in a number of villages.
3. Support development of the agricultural system, which consists of activities that affect the sustainability of NRM, such as:
Support the expansion of paddy fields, the development of cultivated areas for the purpose of permanent land use and an irrigation system for agriculture. The improvement of small dams for paddy fields has also been supported and some have already been implemented in Ban Huai Hee, Ban Huai Moo Bon, Ban Huai Ma-ngo Bon/Lang, ban Nong Khao Lang and Ban Huai Poo Loei Support development of the water supply system for home consumption, which has already been implemented in Ban Huai Wuai and Ban Ma-ngo Bon/Lang. Manage the participatory planning process for the development of the agricultural production system for 1996/97 in 13 target villages (prepared for the support of production factors during the 1996 farming season). Support the frog raising trial in Ban Huai Hee. Support the implementation of raising chickens by the women's group in Ban Huai Tong. Support the development of an integrated farm system in Ban Huai Mai Dam. Support the establishment of an agricultural extension station in Huai Poo Ling (currently found in Ban Huai Mai Dam). Support wheat planting trials during the dry season, in cooperation with the District Agriculture Office (implemented already on 10 rai of land in Ban Huai Mai Dam, Ban Pa Mak and Ban Huai Tong Ko). Support vegetable production for home consumption and local market trading during the dry season in Ban Huai Tong and Ban Huai Poo Loei. Support commercial brown rice production trials by the women's group in Ban Mai Dam to prepare for the future. Support fruit tree seedling production by volunteer farmers in Ban Huai Mai Dam, Ban Pa Mak and Ban Huai Tong Ko. Support the development of animal grazing land and the improvement of cattle breeds in Ban Huai Poo Loei. Support activities to prevent animal diseases in cooperation with the district livestock office (Mae Hong Son). Support the grafting of persimmon varieties of fruit to produce a better quality in Ban Huai Tong, Ban Huai Poo Loei, Ban Huai Mai Dam, Ban Mai, Ban Pa Mak etc.
4. Coordination with community organizations and government and non government agencies involved to support development
1. Coordination and planning together with Tambon council and administrative organizations in order to set up the guidelines for the role and responsibility towards NRM by community organizations.
2. Coordination with government agencies, particularly at provincial and forestry office level, to organize a forum. A group of invited representatives and leaders of communities with NRM within the site of Ban Huai Poo Ling and other areas in Mae Hong Son province can, therefore, express their opinions. They may also participate in forming guidelines among communities/non-governmental organizations to support the community in NRM in a sustainable way etc.
5. The conservation of forest has been enhanced by using the community based land use management working approach in Tambon Huai Poo Ling since 1991. Up to now, the forest of 29,500 rai, found mainly in the watershed area, has been protected by the community organization. Rules and regulations for the management of this region have also been set up.
IV. Lessons Learned
1. Basically, villagers in all village sites in Huai Poo Ling have strong cultural traditions incorporated in the conservation of Page 40 of 65
natural resources. Nevertheless, they must have the continuous support of development officers and agencies, especially in the issues of rules and regulations; laws and policies of the government; guidelines for work participation with the community; techniques such as map reading, land use mapping, and communication skills - particularly with government agencies.
2. It was found that the 3-dimensional topographic model proved to be significant as a tool for the discussion process, communication and a better understanding between development officers and villagers. It stimulated debate and its visual effects contributed towards reaching a faster agreement.
3. The implementation of NRM by the community organization is considered a big and complex issue. More of a joint effort from within the community is necessary to enable the ordinary individual to understand. For management to take place, it may even need the internal community process. The development officer must comprehend the community profoundly and not only their problems regarding natural resources or the forest. The relationship of the man in the community, socially and economically, must be fully understood,
4. The central aspect of NRM by the community organization is in itself the management system. If support from the exterior emphasises on strengthening and developing the capability of the organization, then it could lead to a more sustainable task.
V. Summary and Suggestions
1. For highland areas with `characteristics and conditions similar to Tambon Huai Poo Ling, the agricultural production system serves as an important factor for the survival or destruction of forest resources, particularly its plant biodiversity. The highland cultivation system of permanent paddy field, and the support for increasing paddy development, should be considered and supported properly by the Tambon administrative organization in terms of a financial budget for surveys and implementation tasks.
2. The community-based natural resource management is .a task which should be implemented using the bottom-up approach. The implementing officer should, therefore, provide more importance to the opinions and suggestions of the community and also, suggest working guidelines that do not over-shadow the ideas of the villagers. The recommendations and alternative solutions that are proposed with the villagers should always be considered as a learning process, because this serves as the key issue in the development of the individual and the community.
3. The support for the role of the community in NRM at village and Tambon level is already considered right and proper. However, if this task is allowed to expand further and implemented at a larger scale, guidelines must be proposed for more cooperation from the forestry and provincial government offices.
4. The community and network organization should acquire information continuously in order to assist each other in monitoring and contributing to the future policy of NRM by the community. They should keep in contact with other networks involved on similar issues such as the northern region alternative agriculture network, Mae Tha watershed network, Mae Sa watershed network, and others.
Natural Resource Management by Community Organization
A Case Study of Ban Huai Hee, Moo 8, Tambon Huai Poo Ling,
Muang District, Mae Hong Son Province
by Tawee Tinwana
This case study presents the origin and history of the "Pa-ka-ker-yor" (Karen) community in Mae Hong Son province. It is an example of people who exist by living as "men of the forest", which is in harmony with their community's way of life, culture and traditions. They have attempted to focus and work with the method and process adopted by the Thai-German Highland Development Programme (TG-HDP). Particular attention has been paid to the adjustment of the community, current production system, ceremonial rites and the results of natural resource management (NRM) - past and present - especially regarding soil, water and forest.
I. History of the origin and the characteristics of the Huai Hee settlement
Ban Huai Hee has been a Pa-ka-ker-yor (Karen) hilltribe village for more than 20 years. It was proclaimed as a key village in 1983 with a permanent address of Moo 8, Tambon Huai Poo Ling, Muang district, Mae Hong Son province, with Mr. Chanpon Tanalue as the elected headman. The village is located along the northern slopes about 26 km from the town of Mae Hong Son. It is the first village at the entrance to the Huai Poo Ling area (when travelling from Ban Hua Nam Mae Sa Kud). The Page 41 of 65
population consists of 127 villagers: 69 male and 58 female, in a total of 22 families. Their existence is based mainly on close family relationships of about 2-3 clans and they have been found to cooperate with each other quite well. The village administration is formal with a village committee based on the seniority system, which has been chosen and accepted by the people. The village headman is highly capable, especially in coordinating and requesting support from relevant agencies.
1. Production system
Ban Huai Hee relies mainly on subsistence agriculture with a major focus on crop cultivation and animal raising. There is no paddy cultivation because the village is situated on high slopes, which are unsuitable for this type of farming. Crop production follows the "fallow rotation system", which can be referred to as integrated bio-diversed agriculture. The planting area is cultivated mainly with upland rice. Between the rows, vegetable crops are grown such as pumpkin, cucumber, beans, chili, eggplant, corn and some edible plant species that can be stored as food for the dry season.
As for animal raising, various types such as cattle, buffalo, goats, swine, chickens and ducks are reared by the people. Cattle, buffalo and goats are raised more as a source of income while swine, chickens and ducks are reared for mainly home consumption.
Regarding crop production and animal raising activities, based on discussions held with village leaders and representatives, the villagers still lack the appropriate management system. In relation to crops, the uncertain yield of rice during each harvest season is evidence of this. However, those circumstances might also be due to soil characteristics, unpredictable climate and other reasons which are beyond human control. Likewise, the villagers have raised animals by allowing them to stay in the forest for several months unattended, therefore, leaving a high tendency for the newly born to die.
2. Natural resource management (NRM) system
If the NRM system of the Karen community is studied and understood, it could show that existing resources are identified into sub-types or categories in a distinct and systematic way. For example, conservation forest, cultivation areas, multipurpose forest etc., and the rules and regulations are based on their own culture and tradition. The use of each type of community forest is in accordance with details of different regulations. For instance, the community rules on the use of forest resources are to adjust and suit the present situation.
II. Concept of participatory natural resource management by the community
The TG-HDP resource personnel and field staff, who have been associated with Huai Poo Ling area and Huai Hee village in particular, believe that the conservation of highland resources would only be successful if the rights of the inhabitants are recognized. The villagers should also be able to participate and contribute their ideas towards achieving sustainable living conditions in these mountains and forests. They also believe in the need for a holistic development approach, which integrates agricultural practices with social traditions and activities, Such a process requires mutual understanding and fair cooperation between village communities and networks, and development workers from GOs and NGOs based on the principles of
community participation self-reliance equity of gender coordination and cooperation with government agencies at field and policy levels.
Using these guiding principles and information collected during Rural Systems Analysis, community members and TG-HDP field staff devised the following strategies and guidelines for NRM in Ban Huai Hee:
Strategy Guidelines
1. Promote/strengthen the capability of the 1. Review/improve the regulations/rules/mores of community organization in natural resource the community to use, conserve and manage management. natural resources.
2. Land use planning with participation of the 2. Conduct a forum for exchange of ideas/methods community organization, improve/develop of natural resource management among villagers appropriate agricultural production and agencies responsible
3. Establish and develop group leaders to-have 3. Support the establishment of the network capability in the management of natural resources organization for natural resource management, of the community and spread to other communities. 4. Seek/develop the technology/ alternatives for agriculture appropriate for future use.
5. Develop the capability of the organization towards skills in management, analysis of situation/problems and planning of community Page 42 of 65
development.
The community based land use planning and local watershed management (CLM) working steps and methodology used in Huai Hee village have broadly followed those described in Section 2 of this document.
III. Results of implementation
Past and present results from the implementation of the TG-HDP could be summarized, as follows:
Learning process management among villagers and project staff officers/development agents in relation to the concepts of NRM and CLM, with the objective of fulfilling a substantial philosophy that "people can exist in the forest in a sustainable way" This has been implemented through major activities, including:
1. Organization of field trips, outside the project area, to sites which have been successful in NRM such as Mae Wang watershed network in Tambon Mae Win, Mae Wang district, Chiang Mai province; Mae Tha watershed network in Mae On subdistrict, Chiang Mai province; and others.
2. Provide support for the villagers to construct village topographic model to serve as a tool for planning their own NRM.
3. Support a village forum, conducted for the villagers, to exchange experiences in the management of their own natural resources between villages and other networks e.g. Mae Wang watershed network etc.
4. Support preparation for the identification of important community resources, particularly in Ban Huai Hee watershed area, and the submission of more details regarding its annual land use planning.
5. Support the village organization in reviewing and establishing rules and regulations in the village use of natural resources such as land, water and forest.
1. Management Regulations of Ban Huai Hee Community Forest
1. An individual with the right to use wood for house construction or basic needs within the community, must have a permanent house registration in the village.
2. It is forbidden to use forest wood for sale or commercial trading outside the village. Violators of this rule will be handed a penalty or fined according to the law.
3. The village committee should be made aware of each wood cutting including the purpose, utilization and exact location from where the wood was taken.
4. The committee will not be responsible for individuals who do not follow their mutual agreement and are later arrested.
5. The cutting of trees by using a machine or electric saw is strictly forbidden.
6. It is not permitted to cut trees in conservation forest, watershed areas or forest sites near streams.
7. Forest fire seen in the community should be extinguished immediately. However, prevention methods must always be taken.
8. When a rice field or cultivated area is to be burned, a fire break line should first be established, and the village committee and villagers must always be informed of the occurrence.
9. Non-residents of the village have no right to cut trees in the community forest including the collection/harvest of rattan and bamboo shoots.
10. It is not permitted to hunt in the community's conservation forest.
IV. Lessons Learned
1. Study tours or field trips enabled community leaders to gain more first hand knowledge of actual situations and they presented the opportunity to exchange experiences in NRM with other organizations. This served as a means to conceptualize and encourage the application of these experiences in their own locality. Page 43 of 65
2. The use of the village topographic model assisted in the planning of NRM (land, water and forest) and provided a better understanding of the situation. Therefore, the use of other tools, particularly communication with people/agencies from outside the village, was unnecessary.
3. The discussion forum provided more participation of the community, enabled actual problem resolution and gave better results towards sustainable development.
4. The development that stemmed from self-conceptualization and self implementation is thought to be geared more appropriately towards the sustainability of the community.
5. The development that emphasized on basic infrastructure, such as roads and electricity for the villagers, affected the change in culture, tradition, beliefs and lifestyle of the community.
6. The development that strengthened the capabilities of the community organization enabled it to manage its own natural resources by applying its own culture and tradition. The implementation of activities created more participation of the people and recognition from those outside the village.
In summary, NRM was in existence at Ban Huai Hee around the same time as in other Karen villages. The only difference was the fact that the former NRM system was not widely known outside their village. Outsiders also had no knowledge of how the management system worked, For this reason, the TG-HDP came in to provide assistance to the villagers. It enabled them to have a better understanding of NRM through activities such as the discussion forum, study tours, production of media materials including tools for lectures and communication, and a management system (topographic models, land maps etc.). However, there are now changes that are taking place in the community such as a reduction of fallow fields used for rotation, people's access to the marketing system, increase in village population etc. Therefore, the planning process for land use and watershed management by the community organization contributed greatly to the villagers' ability to analyze and predict future changes, including those to their way of life. The most appropriate method of NRM should appear similar to those changes the villagers have prepared for. Community-based land use management would also allow the villagers to have the opportunity to exchange experiences with other organizations.
V. Recommendations
1. The community should try to maintain their village topographic model and land use maps for the future utilization of NRM.
2. The community should provide maintenance and monitoring on the use/management of their own natural resources (land, water and forest) according to the rules and regulations established by the village.
3. The community should continue to conduct the discussion forum in order to strengthen its NRM according to its beliefs and local indigenous knowledge, in order to:
allow non-residents to understand better the land use system of the village (rotational areas). explain forest maintenance with the use of models, land use maps and the rules and regulations in proper documented form to people from outside the community. show village outsiders the proper identification and boundaries of each type of community resource.
4. Whether the community forest act exists or not, villagers should be prepared to fight for their rights, appraisals, and the categorization and implementation of their ceremonial activities. This would indicate to village outsiders their ability to manage their forest, which includes ways by which they can increase its fertility.
References:
1. Ban Huai Hee information files. 1990-l993. Summary Report of the Project Implementation of the Thai-German Highland Development Programme.
2. Niyom Chaislip. 1997. Summary Document of the Working Experience in Natural Resource Management by Community Organization.
3. Waraluck, A. and Somsak S. A Case Study on the Rotational Fallow System of the Karen Hilltribe.
Changes in Agriculture and Land Use: Case Study
of Ban Nam Rin, Pang Ma Pha Subdistrict, Mae Hong Son Page 44 of 65
Kwanchewan Buadaeng
This study was carried out to assess changes in agriculture and land use in Nam Rin referring to period before the presence of the TG-HDP and up until the present day. Data and information presented in this report are from relevant TG-HDP internal papers (IP) 2 and a field study conducted during the period July 6-9, 1996. The field study applied PRA methods especially semi-structured interviews, group and village meetings and transect walks. Villagers shared their knowledge and experiences by using visual aids i.e. topographic models, mapping and ranking on charts. Major findings presented here are quite conclusive. Additional details are available in the annexes. Assessment of the sustainability of the system is presented. Recommendations are proposed in the final section for the improvement of the project approaches and activities.
1. Major Findings
1.1 A typical Lisu village with rival clan factions:
Nam Rin was founded by 14 Lisu and 2 Lahu households in 1963. The group moved from Chiang Dao district, Chiang Mai province in order to find more fertile places for cultivation of opium. Later, many other groups joined which enlarged the village to 60-70 households by 1973. Due to the suppression of opium cultivation in 1973-1974, all except 6 households moved away. Subsequently, other villagers gradually moved in again until there are altogether 62 households in 1996.
Two big clans, "Lao Lee", which is related to village founder and "Ya Khet" which moved in later, have been contesting for the headman position for many years. This has recently become so serious that no village meetings are held and organization of development activities requiring collective participation is not possible (See details in Annex 1: History of Settlement and Clan faction) .
1.2 Land tenure is complicated:
Even though all village lands officially belong to the state's wildlife sanctuary, two types of land tenureship are claimed:
Communal owned land -- watershed and natural forest
A large part of the watershed forest consists of former opium fields which were formerly individually used. It has been returned to the community due to the termination of opium cultivation. Natural forest has been left as it is not suitable for cultivation. This part of the land is estimated to be more than 10,000 rai (1,600 hectare).
Individual owned land - cultivated and fallow land
This type of land is owned by the Lisu of Nam Rin and those in other nearby villages (who were in Nam Rin before). Some households who have large areas of land have within the last 5 years sold fields close to the road to outsiders. However, they usually still cultivated this land as it was generally bought for investment purposes. Some households have also rented land to farmers from other villages i.e. Sobpong. Karen farmers from Mae U Mong also own and cultivated paddy fields inside Nam Rin village boundary.
1.3 Changes in agriculture:
Kinds of crops: Opium, the only traditional cash crop, was heavily eradicated by the army in 1985. As a result, opium cultivation declined and completely stopped in 1989. The TG-HDP introduced red kidney bean and coffee to replace opium and as components in the Soil and Water Conservation package starting in 1987. The agro business sector has promoted a contract farming system for several cash crops in most of Pang Ma Pha since 1990, when the paved road to Chiang Mai was completed. In 1996, diverse kinds of cash crops were found in Nam Rin e.g. green bean, tomato, ginger and cabbages. Other crops have been tried out before they were dropped due to their low profitability. Farmers opted for short term crops i.e. green bean because they wanted a quick cash return to buy rice and other necessities.
Villagers still grow rice but on less land area than before. The number of rice growing households fluctuates from year to year in line annual changes in returns from cash crops. In 1989, rice was quite sufficient with 81 percent of households producing more than 180 kg. per consumption unit. In 1991, the second year of green bean production, farmers grew less rice and reported rice shortages. In 1993, green bean production gave lower returns and there were conflicts with brokers. This resulted in 1994 that again 81 percent of households grew rice. Rice is also reportedly grown by most farmers in 1996. Farmers still grow maize but include also improved varieties for sale. (See details in Annex 2: Development of cash cropping)
Kinds of animals: From around 1,000 pigs (3) , the village has not more than 100 pigs now (4). Villagers complain that keeping pigs in stables makes them weak and that they do not like to eat. They gave up raising cattle (from around 200 cattle freely roaming in the forest) in 1982.
Agricultural technology: Villagers reported using herbicides, including salt since the time they cultivated opium. However, amount of herbicide used in cash crop cultivation has increased from 2-3 litres to about 10 litres per household. Pesticides and chemical fertilizers are also used intensively, even in rice fields.
Labour: Farmers work many more days now than previously. During March May, they harvest garlic, tomatoes etc., then Page 45 of 65
prepare land to plant cash crops such as vegetables, ginger, maize etc. Traditionally, during this time, they had much less work. From June to August, farmers also work harder to maintain cash crops by weeding, fertilizing and spraying whilst in the past they had to weed only in maize and rice fields. Traditionally, farmers worked harder in February when they had to cut trees to prepare for cultivation and in September when they prepared land for opium cultivation. October-January remains a peak crop harvesting period for farmers. (See details in Annex 3: Agricultural calendar)
However, most labour is still carried out be the villagers themselves. Only 6 Shan labourers were reported to be working in the village on a crop sharing basis. Land owners provide them with all inputs (which are given on credit), the labourers do all work and the returns are shared half and half Men and women share farm work more or less equally as before.
Marketing: Three factories (Chiang Mai Frozen Food 1 and 2 and UFC) are represented by brokers who extend green beans and buy the product at guaranteed farm gate prices. Other crops are also sold to traders who buy them on-farm or are transported by farmers themselves to sell in town (there are 4 pick-ups in Nam Rin in 1996).
Credit system: Many kinds of village revolving funds have been initiated by Responsible Implementing Agencies (RIAs). In 1996, the village was provided with a "poverty alleviation fund" amounting to 280,000 Baht. This has been borrowed from equally by 54 households. However, it was reported that money from several of the funds was outstanding due to delayed repayments. There is also a tendency for loans to be taken out by members of one or other clan, depending on who was in charge of the fund. Using a group guarantee system, the Bank of Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC) has extended credit to 2 saving groups which are organized according to clan and lineage relationships. The money is supposed to be used for investment in cash cropping, but, in fact, it is also used for other purposes such as buying cars and televisions. So far, they have been paying back the bank on time, not from the profit from cash cropping activities, but by borrowing from informal sources (such as the former headman of Kud Sam Sib) with a 10 percent per month interest rate.
1.4 Changes in land use:
Due to the increase in cash cropping, farmers are now using smaller areas of upland but more intensively than before. Traditionally, one household would use as much as 20 rai: 10-l5 rai for opium cultivation and 5-10 rai for rice cultivation. Maize was planted in part of the opium area(5). In 1996, one household uses approximately 5 rai: 3 rai for rice cultivation and 2 rai for many kinds of cash crops which are grown on rotational basis. Land nearby the village which has easy access for transportation of produce is intensively used for cash cropping. (See more information on Annex 4: Present land use)
Buffer strips with vetiver grass and other crops i.e. pineapple have been adopted but by relatively few farmers. Despite many years of promotion by RIAs 6 , the assistant headman still maintains that "villagers do not understand, they say they (buffer strips) used up the land and compete with crops" (see details on SWC adoption in TG-HDP IP 165)
Irrigated paddy fields covering 33 rai and owned by 6 households are also used intensively with rice followed by garlic.
Villagers recognize the importance of protecting the watershed forest because it is the only source of the water used for household purposes and agriculture (especially in the paddy fields). Farmers have joined together to grow forest trees in watershed areas since 1993. Unfortunately, many trees were recently destroyed as a result of fire spreading from upland fields.
Land use is not limited only to areas inside the village boundary (determined by mountain ridges). Some farmers grow ginger on others' land in Nong Pha Jam. Some people from Sobpong also come to cultivate in Nam Rin. Some paddy fields inside the village boundary belong to Mae U Mong farmers.
1.5 Off-farm income
The main sources of off-farm income are from wage labouring and handicraft making. Many young people have gone to work outside the village as far away as Samutsakorn province in the eastern part of Thailand (7). Women work on embroidery and handicrafts by order and for sale to tourists and Lisu people in other villages. Women reported that they now work longer hours than previously because of this handicraft business. Even though, average off-farm income (from all sources) per household (14,873 Baht) is higher than average cash income from agriculture (8,937 Baht) (survey by TG-HDP Community Development Coordinator in 1994), only twenty percent of households regard off-farm activities as their main career. Most still regard farming as their main occupation.
2. Assessment of sustainability of the system
2.1 Productivity
In 1994, on average each household produced 549 kg of rice from 1.9 rai of upland and lowland. Rice yield per 1 rai of upland and lowland was 311 kg. and 204 kg, respectively. The upland rice yield was higher than that of 10 villages surveyed in the same year (TG-HDP IP 179). This may be the result of the use of external inputs: herbicides and fertilizer. The comparatively low lowland rice yield was due in part to the poor techniques employed (the Lisu do not traditionally cultivate irrigated rice) and in part to much of the survey information being derived from newly leveled paddies. Yields have since increased substantially as the soil has settled. Farmers derived income from many cash crops in 1994 with an average of 8,281 Baht per household which was almost twice as high as that gained in 1989. (See Annex 5: Income ) Page 46 of 65
2.2 Stability
Traditionally, the agricultural system in Nam Rin was quite stable. Farmers grew rice and maize for human and animal consumption and opium for sale. Animals were raised for meat and for draught power. Even though rice production was sometimes not sufficient, opium was relatively stable and some of the cash income derived could be used to buy rice. Nowadays, the system is less stable as the people move toward commercialization with a focus on a range of cash crops. They now raise fewer livestock than previously. Some years crop prices are high, whilst other years they fall considerably. For example, in 1994 tomatoes fetched for 17-18 Baht a kilo. The following year the price fell as low as 1.5 Baht a kilo.
2.3 Self-sufficiency/dependency
Rice is grown on an average area of 1.9 rai with a yield of 549 kg. per household (1994). In contrast, in 1983 on average a Lisu household grew 8.8 rai of rice. By 1989, each Lisu household produced an average 1,312 kg of rice. Clearly, less rice is now being produced in the village and need to be purchase rice has increased. Also, as less pigs are now raised, there is more dependence on meat purchased from outside.
Increased income from cash crops and off-farm activities has increased self sufficiency in one respect, but at the same time there is an increased dependency on external inputs and markets over which the villagers have little control.
2.4 Natural resources quality
There is sufficient water throughout the whole year. Forest areas have regenerated and the villagers have attempted to establish more forest trees in watershed areas. However, weed infestation is serious on land which is permanently cultivated. Increasing doses of herbicides are being used. It is not clear whether or not the fertility of soil has declined. Yields were reported to be lower but this might be due to increased weed infestations. Impact on soil quality from the use of salt and sometimes salt with gasoline is not clear.
2.5 Equity and wealth
Silver decorations have been pawned in Mae Hong Son by some households. Those that did not pay interest had their silver seized by the pawnshop owner. In general, villagers reported being equally poor now when compared with the past. As noted above, average total annual income from all sources in 1994 was only 23,810 Baht (or 65 Baht a day). Only 2 households obtained an annual cash income from agriculture of more than 30,000 Baht. However, when off-farm income is included, 13 households attained annual incomes of more than 30,000 Baht (Among these, 1 is a teacher, 5 are employed by local agencies and 1 sold a piece of land).
In conclusion, Nam Rin villagers produce less rice (from a much smaller area, but with higher yields) and raise many fewer livestock. They instead grow many cash crops and gain higher incomes. Off-farm activities also contribute substantial incomes to farm households. However, since they have to buy more rice, pay for high cost agricultural inputs and buy more facilities (electric appliances, motorcycles etc.), the additional income gained is often not enough. The fluctuations of crop prices add to a generally unstable economic situation. Villagers obtain loans from the BAAC but have to borrow from informal sources with high interest rates to pay off their credit to the bank. The selling of land and assets such as silver decorations are indicators of a decrease in wealth.
3. Reflections and Strategic Recommendations
There are still options to diversify not only crops but also livestock. Farmers used to keep cattle and horses before they were disposed off in response to the advent of permanent cropping. Forest resources where livestock could be raised are available. The main problem seems to be that of management. The villagers should be encouraged to reconsider large animal raising and analyse whether this is again possible. Increasing livestock raising would reduce farmers' risk from growing only cash crops. Integration of livestock with crops would also reduce dependency on external inputs. Lahu villages have been relatively successful in fencing areas for livestock. Could the Nam Rin villagers consider this? What are the constraints? "Regenerating technology" and "recycling" methods could be considered. It seems that farmers' increasing use of large external inputs may lead not only to indebtness but might also be harmful to the quality of natural resources. Other existing SWC practices using low cost inputs could be surveyed and further tested. The present situation is that there are 3 brokers for green bean production. Two from rival clan factions and another one who is not clan affiliated. This is an improvement on the situation when there was only one broker. This broker was usually accused of reducing the weight of other clans' produce and adding more weight for his own clan. Maintaining more brokers has helped to reduce conflict between clans and encourage competition to provide better services among the brokers. Green bean is the most profitable crop but the use of substantial amounts of pesticides and wood as stakes have a most negative impact on the health of people and the environment. Agro-industrial companies which carry out contract farming in the area are actually one stakeholder in the use of natural resources. They should be involved in the conservation of the resources not only in Nam Rin but at sub-district or higher administrative levels. BAAC should systematically monitor its own activities to assess whether the effectiveness and efficiency of its operations can be improved. The integration of its operations with the contract farming systems operated by agro- industrial companies should be improved. TG-HDP could try to develop regular procedures in which major stakeholders comprising, RIAs, agro-industrial companies and the BAAC participate to develop options which are positive for improving the villagers' well -being and environmental conditions. Page 47 of 65
Land use planning should focus on the learning process of villagers, project staff and RIAs. This will contribute to better/iterative understandings of changes in land uses, changing factors, villagers' strategies and impacts from their practices in order to plan and support better options for land use in the longer term. Some issues regarding land use in Nam Rin which are not well understood are for example, 1) the relation between indebtedness and land transactions, 2) what are appropriate forms of watershed forest management for farmers to think about (unclear reasons why the forest fire spread into the planted watershed forest) 3) what are the arrangements for the use of land by farmers from other villages 4) changes in forestry policy and administrative framework and their relevance to Nam Rin villagers, etc. The "community-based" approach might need to be modified according to differences in socio-economic and local communities conditions. As Lisu are generally likely to cooperate among members of the same clan often even beyond village boundaries, resource management along clan lines could be considered as an appropriate strategy. A committee on local watershed management could be made up of powerful leaders from different clans who may reside in different villages. As Lisu like to work individually, individual households could be given responsibility to manage natural resources under the control of clan and village organizations.
Annex 1: History of Settlement and Clan Factions
Table 1: Chronicle of Movement
Year Description No. of HHs From/to
1963 First group of Lisu and Lahu founded the 16 Chiang Dao, Chiang Mai village (Lao Mee and Lao Lee clan)
1966-1973 Lisu group related to the first group's 70 (in 1973) Fang and Phrao, Chiang Mai and Vieng clan joined in Pa Pao, Chiang Rai
1973-1974 Most Lisu moved out due to opium 6 Mea Chaem, Chiang Mai, nearby suppression villages in Pang Ma Pha and Pai Mae Hong Son
1976-1983 Lisu of Ya Khet clan moved in 40 (in 1983) Pai, Mae Hong Son and Chiang Dao, Chiang Mai
1983 The village was registered by District 40 Office; the first headman was appointed; very few households moved in/out
Under the leadership of Mr. Yi Lao Lee, the first group of 14 Lisu families and 2 Lahu Nyi families came from Chiang Mai to settle at Ban Nam Rin in 1963. After that more households of the same clan joined the first group. In 1973-1974, the government launched opium suppression in Nam Rin which was close to the road. Most households, including Mr. Yi Lao Lee moved out to settle new villages far from the road but near to Nam Rin namely Ban Nong Pha Jam, Nong Tong, Kud Sam Sib and Mae Moo Lisu. Only 6 households who occupied plenty of land and raised a lot of big animals stayed on. Later, more Lisu households, mainly from Ya Khet clan, migrated in from Pang Paek in Pai and Sam Muen, Chiang Dao.
Many household movements in and out led to complications in land tenure. Those who moved out to nearby villages still claim land ownership but let their relatives work the land for free. One farmer interviewed said the owner agreed to sell him the land many years ago for an agreed price, but he still hasn't paid him. Recently, because of increasing land value, the owner withdrew his agreement and ask him to stop working on his land. The farmer thinks that the owner may want to sell it at a much higher price, even though all village land area is within the Pai Wildlife Sanctuary, a protected area and no land titles can be issued.
The total number of households fluctuated according to the movement in/out of some households. In 1996, there are 62 households.
There are two major clans and other minor clans in the village. 8 Traditionally, religious leaders and senior persons from each clan form a senior council which is the informal government body of a Lisu village. However, in Nam Rin the friction between the two major clans is so serious that the official village headman selected from one clan is not accepted by the other clan and a senior council cannot be formed to reconcile this situation. Since 1983, when Nam Rin was upgraded to village status, there have been 4 official village headmen factionized with the two major clans as shown in Table 2.
Table 2: List of Village Headmen
Name of village Clan Faction Years in position Reason of resigning headman Page 48 of 65
Sapia Lao Mee Lao Lee 1983-1984 Pressure from Ya Khet clan to resign
Ama Ya Khet Ya Khet 1985-1990 Found guilty in faking official documents
Winai Lao Moo Ya Khet 1990-1992 Found guilty in committing adultery
Wirat Lao Lee Lao Lee 1993-present
"Ya Khet" clan has the largest number of members. It is among the last group which moved into the village after 1976. The pressure on the first headman to resign was mainly from the Ya Khet clan. Ama Ya Khet was in the position quite long -- 5 years - because he was supported by members of his clan. He would have been in the position even longer if he had not been found guiltly of faking documents required for the Thai citizenship applications for his relatives. Winai Lao Moo, Ama Ya Khet's son-in-law then tilled the position, but only for 2 years before he was forced to resign after being found guilty of committing adultery. The present headman, Winai Lao Lee is a nephew of Yi Lao Lee, the first leader who founded the village and then moved to a nearby village. In 1996, the present headman was in a shaky situation because members of the Ya Khet clan asked him to resign. They rallied at the district and provincial offices to ask the officials concerned to dismiss the headman from the position. There were no clear charges against the headman but that he was negligent of his duties. The headman also insisted on continuing in his position (9). Officials from the district office later held a meeting in the village and asked villagers to vote if they still wanted to have this headman or not. The result was that the headman won. However, the problem is not resolved. The opposing clan have vowed not to join any village meeting and development activity led by the headman.
Annex 2: Development of Cash Cropping
The Lisu's main traditional crops were opium, maize and rice; the first one was grown for cash, and the other two were for subsistence. Nam Lang is a good area for opium cultivation. All Lahu and Lisu villages in the area cultivated opium poppy from the time they arrived. Lisu in Nam Rin reported growing at least 10 rai (1 rai= .16 hectare) of opium in 3-4 plots per household. The opium yield was around 1.5 joy (1 joy=1.6 kg.) per rai. Opium is not perishable so farmers can keep it the whole year and sell it when money is needed. One farmer reported selling opium at prices from 700 Baht per joy until the price increased to 2,000-3,000 Baht, 10,000 Baht and even as high as 25,000 Baht over a 20 years period before 1985.
The government's opium eradication programme was launched in 1985. Soldiers from the Third Army (of the Northern region) were assigned to destroy the crop, mostly by slashing at about flowering time". Opium cultivation was then reduced to supply addicts, disappearing in 1989.
After 1985, many cash crops have been grown as alternatives to opium. Farmers dropped less profitable ones e.g. marigold flowers, baby corn, carrot. Those being grown in 1996 are listed in the below table.
Table 3: List of cash crops found in 1996
Kinds Year started Extended by
Fruit trees 1984 At the beginning seedlings weer extended by army units and continually provided by TG-HDP and many local agencies
Maize 1987 Improved variety provided by TG-HDP for planting in SWC plots
Red kidney bean 1987 Seed provided by TG-HDP for planting in SWC plots
Green bean 1990 Extended by a broker from Chiang Mai Frozen Food Company
Garlic Formerly grown by themselves for home consumption but for sale from 1990
Lettuce 1991 Planted by farmers' own initiatives
Cabbage 1991 Planted by farmers' own initiatives
Tomato 1994 Planted by farmers' own initiatives
Ginger 1995 Planted by farmers' own initiatives Page 49 of 65
However, the real boom in cash cropping in Nam Rin, as well as other villages Nam Lang, really started since 1990. The increasing set up of food processing factories in Chiang Mai and surrounding provinces influenced this boom (11). For example, green bean was extended by one factory at the beginning and later by three factories in Chiang Mai and Lam Pang with hundreds of rai being grown in Pang Ma Pha. The crop is planted under contract farming systems: brokers provide crop seeds and other inputs on credit, transfer the planting technologies and buy on-farm with a guaranteed price. Villagers later found out that many other cash crops are also demanded by markets in Chiang Mai. They plant more diversified cash crops and sell them to open markets.
Lisu people are generally considered to be active and innovative. They learned how marketing systems work and now handle them very well, even though traditionally they did not have such experience (12). They are also good at maximizing the benefits from doing business. For example, at the beginning when the green bean business was a problem (13), an assistant headman and headmen of two related Lisu villages went to see the agro-business factory manager to ask to be brokers themselves. They said they already knew the process of being brokers. Their request was rejected so they protested by not growing beans for one cropping season and looking for other crops by themselves.
(They even sell carrots by themselves when they are expected to be sold under a contract farming agreement). Although the villagers were not accepted as brokers, their protest resulted in the existing brokers improving their management. Now there are many more brokers in the area and the people always assess who can give them the best benefit. and then they select the broker accordingly.
Annex 3: Agricultural Calendar
3.1 Cash cropping activities in 1995
Kinds of crops Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Upland rice Plant Maintain Harvest Paddy rice Plant Maintain Harvest Tomatoes 1st plant Maintain Harvest 2nd plant Maintain Harvest Garlic Maintain Harvest Plant Maintain Green bean 1st Plant Maintain Harvest 2nd Plant Maintain Harvest Red kidney bean Plant Maintain Harvest Lettuce/Cabbage Plant Maintain Harvest Maize Plant Maintain Harvest Ginger Plant Maintain Harvest
Annex 4: Present land use
From the survey carried out by the Community Development Coordinator (CDC) in 1996, on average each household occupied 21 rai (14) of upland and lowland areas If 5.3 rai and .8 rai is used annually by each household for cultivation of annual crops and perennials as shown in Table 4.1, around 15 rai of forest land is left fallow.
Table 4.1 Percentage of households growing various crops and area per household in 1994
Crops % of planting Total area (rai) Average area per Average area per households household (rai) planting household (rai)
Rice 81 115 1.9 2.3
Maize 41 30 .5 1.2
Tomatoes 24 13 .2 1
Green bean 71 57 .9 1.4
Red kidney bean 34 39 .6 1.9
Cabbage 19 15 .2 1.3
Garlic 59 50 .8 1.5 Page 50 of 65
Ginger 19 12 .2 1
Perennials* 76 36 .6 .8
Total 325 5.3 6.1
* Most of the perennials grown in Nam Rin are lychees and mangoes. Others include coffee, peaches, jackfruits, tamarind etc. The area is calculated from total number of trees which is 3,636. Of this number, only 944 trees have already born fruits.
Amongst the annual crops, rice covers the largest area, with green beans and garlic the second and third most important. Tomatoes, cabbage and ginger are planted by only a few farmers. It is noticed that unlike the last three mentioned crops, green beans and garlic have more stable marketing channels and price. The percentage of cultivated land under annual crops is shown in Chart 4.2. Most land along the road (generally with SWC practices) belongs to households with large land areas. Much has recently been sold to outsiders (even though the village and its cultivated land is situated in the Pai Wildlife Sanctuary). Some outsiders are district officials who lent Lisu villagers money. The Lisu have no money to pay off their loans so they offered their land. Others are rich people from other provinces, even from Bangkok. However, villagers still continue working on the land they have sold. Some Lisu sold small pieces of land to other Lisu within and outside the village for either cultivation or building houses. Other Lisu still want to sell their land to obtain money to invest in off farm activities, i.e. grocery shops.
Land use is so diversified that some farmers no longer grow subsistence crops but intensively grow various cash crops. Others rely more on off-farm income -- grocery stores (for local villagers and tourists) and handicrafts; some still grow upland rice and maize under a shifting cultivation system; while others depend more on paddy fields. Thus, land scarcity is not perceived at the same level for all villagers and coping strategies are determined differently.
Annex 5: Income
Table 5.1 Average income from cash crops per (Baht in 1990)
1. Per household
2. Per rai
Tomatoes Green Red kidney Cabbage Garlic Ginger Average bean bean total
1. 1,948 2,336 277 276 2,993 451 8,281
2. 9,138 2,500 433 1,124 3,652 2,292
(see chart 5.1 percentage of cash income from cash crops)
Table 5.2 Percentage of households having income
% of households
Income income from on-farm income from on-and off-farm
(Baht) N % N %
0 6 10 0 0
1-10,000 37 60 16 26
10,001-20,000 12 20 24 40
20,001-30,000 4 7 8 13
>30,000 2 3 13 21
Page 51 of 65
Changes in Agriculture and Land Use:
Case Study of Ban Huai Poo Loei, Huai Poo Ling
Subdistrict, Muang District, Mae Hong Son
Kwanchewan Buadaeng (1)
This study is to assess changes in agriculture and land use in Ban Huai Poo Loei with reference to period before the presence of the TG-HDP (1990) and nowadays (1996). Data and information presented in this report are from relevant TG-HDP internal papers (IP) (2), Community Development Coordinators' (CDCs) internal reports and a field survey carried out during the period July 10-12, 1996. During the field study various techniques were applied including PRA methods, especially semi-structured interviews, group and village meetings and transect walks. Villagers shared their knowledge and experiences by using visual aids i.e. topographic models, mapping and ranking on charts. Major findings and Assessment of the sustainability of the system are presented. Recommendations are proposed in the final section for the improvement of project approaches and activities.
1. Major Findings
1.1 Village Location and History
Huai Poo Loei is the 2nd village tot he south most of Tambon Huai Poo Ling located 75 kms from Mae Hong Son town. Due to difficult road conditions, outsiders usually travel to and from Huai Poo Loei via Pai District using the Pai-Wat Chan-Huai Tong- Huai Poo Loei road which is 81 kms in distance. To the north and the east of Huai Poo Loei are villages within Tambon Muang Paeng, Pai District. To the south and the west are villages within Tambon Pha Bong, Muang District.
The Sgaw Karen settled the village around the present location more than 100 years ago. At the beginning there were only 3 households. The village expanded to 10 households 40 years ago. In 1982, some households moved in from Kaeng Horn increasing the number to around 20 households. The village was expanded to 37 and 44 households in 1990 and 1996 respectively. Since the village foundation, only 4 families have moved out, to Pha Bong and Khun Yuam. Huai Poo Loei was a satellite village of Huai Tong for many years, only recently gaining village status in 1996.
1.2 Change Agents
Missionary, road construction and the Thai-German Highland Development Programme seem to be important agents which have introduced many changes into the village.
The village was christianized around thirty years ago. The Karen Baptist convention (KBC) has supported the village with religious and general development activities especially during the last 15 years. Beside a medicine fund, the establishment of two rice banks were supported by the KBC. The first one was set up almost the same time as villagers converted to Christianity. It aims to support the religious matters and provide social welfare. Rice is sold only when money is needed for religious activities e.g. to repair the church. It can be borrowed by poor households without interest and sometimes by general households with interest. The second rice bank which was set up on 1981 is more profit-oriented. Borrowers have to return rice with 10 percent annual interest. The youth group and women's group were also organized in 1972 and 1981, respectively, to carry out religious activities. Group members conduct activities together to mobilize money for using in religious activities such as growing crops for sale. As villagers mentioned, being Christian have enabled the people to increase their knowledge as some of their children were trained to be priests, Karen characters (4) were also taught to those interested.
A dirt road from Ban Chan and Huai Tong reached Huai Poo Loei in 1982. This enabled villagers to grow taro for sale. Villagers also mentioned that more outsiders came to trade in the village. Some traders were bad as they stole villagers' calves (by loading them on their pick-ups). A hard surfaced road from Ban Chan to Huai Tong was completed in 1994. As a result, villagers started growing vegetables and garlic for sale.
The TG-HDP (1990-1996) has also had an impact on villagers' livelihood. It facilitated many government agencies' e.g. Hilltribe Development and Welfare Unit, Cooperative Office to extend to the villagers services and innovations. Even though many introduced activities have not yet clearly shown concrete results, they have provided learning experiences and laid a good basis for further development.
However, it has to be noted that many changes were brought about by villagers themselves based on indigenous inter-village networks. Men from other villages who married local women brought with them different farming experiences and tried them in Huai Poo Loei.
1.3 Changes in Agricultural Production Page 52 of 65
Traditional crops: Rice from paddy and upland fields is grown by all farmers. The number of paddy owners increased from 7 households 20 years ago to 28 households within a 71 rai area by 1994. However, it seems that fewer farmers are now growing rice in upland plots (72 percent in 1990, and 55 percent in 1996) partly due to more labour time being used for taro cultivation.
Upland rice is still cultivated using a mixed cropping system. All crops needed for household consumption are planted into the cultivated fields i.e. maize, various kinds of bean, vegetables and root crops. Even though fewer farmers grow upland rice, farmers still reported that abundant amounts of vegetables are grown in upland fields which are shared among all villagers. Some farmers also grow vegetables in home gardens (made possible because all cattle are now raised in a fenced area far from the village). The only traditional crop which is no longer grown is cotton.
Cash crops: Farmers started growing taro around 1988. With improved road conditions and increasing need for cash, more farmers now grow taro and have increased their income as indicated below (cost is not deducted).
Table 1: Changes in taro production
1990 1994
Percentage of taro growing households (%) 61 83
Average area per household (rai) 1.1 1.9
Income per household (Baht) 1,224 4,317
In 1995, 4 villagers started growing garlic for sale. One of these is a man from Muang Paeng who married into the village. He already had marketing contacts for this cash crop. The headman also grew garlic last year. Most of the production (400 out of 500 kg) was sold inside the village (20 Baht per kg.) In the future, there will be more farmers growing garlic making the organization of marketing easier. In view of improved road access and thus a better chance to market crops, new vegetables have been tried by some farmers.
Traditionally, villagers grow fruit trees in home gardens for consumption. After 1990, with the support from the TG-HDP and other cooperating agencies, more than 1,000 improved and new varieties of fruit trees are now additionally grown, mainly in a single village-planned area. Mangoes and pears comprise 40 and 29 percent of total number of introduced fruit trees. The remaining 31 percent is comprised of other 7 species i.e. jackfruits, lychee, lemon etc. (internal record 1995) In 1992, some 70 percent of households grafted more than 300 wild persimmon trees with improved varieties. The fruits started bearing in 1996.
Technology: Improved rice varieties have been experimented with for 3-4 years since 1993. Only one variety - Chao Haw - is continuing to be grown by some farmers. Even though the yield of some of the other varieties was higher than traditional ones, other properties did not "tit" with farmers' conditions i.e. having hard husk, ripening too early, tall and easily lodged (by wind) etc. Farmers gave these varieties to neighbouring villages i.e. Huai Tong, San Muang to continue experimenting in their own localities. (See details in Annex 1: Test of Rice Varieties )
A few farmers started using chemical fertilizer when they cultivated taro (6). Pesticides and herbicides have just recently been introduced by a few farmers as a result of pest and disease problems associated with taro production. A special kind of salt has recently been used as a herbicide in paddy and upland rice fields. Ploughing machines were used before the start of the TG-HDP. There are 10 at present. One rice mill is located in the village.
Having seen that some plots are being used quite permanently especially for taro, the project introduced SWC measures mainly buffer strips of leuceana, pigeon pea, vetiver grass, rotation of maize, beans and rice, growing crops along contour lines and mulching. Only one farmer has continued testing these measures in his rice, maize and bean plot since 1993, despite experiencing lower rice yields and increased weed infestation. He has solved pests and disease problem by controlled burning (vetiver grass does not die) and weed pressure by spraying salt. (See details in Annex 2: "SWC Plots" )
Livestock management: A comparison of figures for years 1990 and 1994 show that average numbers of livestock per household has substantially increased, except for buffaloes where the increase is only slight.(7) More farmers owned cattle and ducks but fewer owned buffaloes, pigs and chicken.
Table 2: Percentage of households having animals and average per household
Kinds 1990 1994
Buffaloes 61 1.9 37 2.0
Cattle 50 2.7 78 4.4
Pigs 89 1.9 88 2.5
Ducks 28 .7 56 4.8 Page 53 of 65
Chicken 100 7.8 90 19
Source : Figures of 1990 and 1994 are from IP 155 and CDC's report, respectively.
There has also been a change in livestock management from free roaming to keeping in stall (pigs) and grazing in controlled areas (cattle). No problems were reported except that pigs' legs tend to be weak. (See details on Annex 3: "Management by Controlled Grazing" )
The attempt to improve cattle breed by artificial insemination was not successful. Seven cows were inseminated and one later died. Two improved breed bulls were provided in 1995 upon farmers' request. One bull died. The other one has so far yielded a 2-month old calf (until July 1996).
1.4 Changes in Land Use and Natural Resources
The village settlement area, including home gardens covers some 70 rai. In 1994, a further 313 rai was used for agriculture (98.5 rai - paddy fields, 76 rai - upland rice fields, 76 rai - taro fields and 62 rai - orchards). Paddy fields and orchards are used quite permanently. Taro fields are used semi-permanently, with some left in fallow after being cultivated for l-3 years. Upland rice fields are used for only 1 year and let? fallow for 5- 10 years.
The land tenure system has not much changed. Village areas and orchards are regarded as private properties. Upland fields are communally owned but those close to paddy fields are belong to paddy field owners.
With the completion of a standard road and more frequent contact with outsiders, villagers are increasingly aware of increases in land value and thus the importance of land ownership certificates. Seven farmers obtained land certificates for their paddy fields many decades ago. However, 10 years ago tive handed over their certificates to officials from Mae Hong Son who promised to give them more permanent types of certificates. During 1992-1993, villagers' asked to get the certificates back but the official said that the certificates had been cancelled, however, farmers would be allowed to continue working on their land. Last year the headman asked land officials to come and measure land and for the issuance of land ownership certificates. They did not come.
Actually, watershed forest has long been conserved by Karen farmers. They have also gradually expanded paddy fields to reduce pressure on upland areas. Land use planning and management carried out in cooperation with the project and other cooperating agencies is on one hand to show to outsiders how well they have managed natural resources and on the other hand to control and manage land use (especially by newcomers) inside the village.
Watershed areas have been reforested since 1991 with 30-80 rai being planted annually. At present, some recently established households who do not have paddy fields still cultivate in watershed areas. The village committee is trying to negotiate with them to cultivate in areas planned for either permanent cropping or rotational cultivation. Areas for rotational cultivation were reportedly good enough to maintain a reasonable cultivation-fallow ratio for the next 5-10 years. Permanent upland fields include the area where an irrigation system has been established with support from the project and the Land Development Office. (See Annex 4 "Irrigated Communal Plots"):
1.5 Off-farm Income
Around 20 youth working outside the village as far as Bangkok mainly as wage labourers i.e. in construction, restaurants. The number working outside has reportedly increased since the start of the project. Money earned is usually so little that there is not enough to send home. For example, Lung Yo's son went to work on a sugar cane farm in Central Thailand for a month during the 1996 dry season. He earned only 1,000 Baht and had only 400 Baht left when he arrived home.
There are now more off-farm opportunities inside the village than before. The Mae Su Noi Watershed Management Unit set up a site office in the village to produce forest tree seedlings and reforest watershed areas. It hired many villagers both children and adults. (9) With the support from the project, women were also trained for natural dying and weaving textiles for sale.
2. Assessment of sustainability of the system
2.1 Productivity
Even though the yields per rai in 1990 and 1994 may not be fully comparable (the basis for calculation of rice cultivation area is different"), the figures show that paddy rice has a higher yield than upland rice.
Table 3: Rice production in 1990 and 1994
Kinds 1990 1994 Page 54 of 65
% hhs kg/hhs kg/rai % hhs kg kg/rai
Milled paddy rice 89 878 225 78 635 264
Milled upland rice 72 284 71 73 383 201
Total milled rice* 100 1,162 147 98** 1,018 236
Note:
* 1 kg. Unmilled rice = 2/3 kg. milled rice
** Only one household did not produce rice because the household head is a teacher.
Income from crops was much higher in 1994 than in 1990. Income from livestock was much less, even though farmers raised many more livestock. Income gained from off-farm activities in 1990 is not available but people now report higher off farm incomes due to the availability of more job opportunities in the area. However, the overall income is still low - only 26 Baht per day in 1994.
Table 4: Income per household from agriculture and off-farm activities
Enterprise 1990 1994
% hh Baht % hh Baht
Crop (taro/bean) 67 1,224 83 4,415
Livestock 72 2,469 15 732
Off-farm n.a. n.a. 20 4,317
Total 88 9,464
2.2 Stability
The overall system is quite stable with almost all households continuing rice cultivation from both paddy and upland fields. The price of taro also does not fluctuate greatly. Farmers still gain some profit even when the price is at its lowest point (4 Baht per kg.). Farmers have also carefully selected garlic as the second cash crop because like taro, its price does not fluctuate too much and the labour requirement does not conflict significantly with the main crop, rice. Livestock raising adds to the stability of the system, mainly still served as savings account. Villagers generally only sell livestock when there is a real necessity.
Paddy rice is more stable than upland rice. In one 3.5 rai paddy field which has been cultivated for 20 years, an owner get rice yield fluctuating around 150-180 tang (using around 28 litres of seed). There was only one year (1992) that only 120 tang was harvested because no-seed problem. Yield of last year (1995) is exceptionally high with 200 tang.
2.3 Self-sufficiency2dependency
Villagers reported increased rice sufficiency than before. Reasons given were: 1) more paddy fields 2) villagers help each other more than previously, particularly through rice banks 3) less disturbance from wildlife 4) increasing rice yields. According to the headman, rice yields are increasing as a result of seed exchange (of the same varieties) every 2-3 years with other villages. He cited the example of his father's field which used to yield some 200 tang of rice. After giving only a part to the headman, the yield has increased to 300 tang.
2.4 Sustainability of natural resources
Farmers are highly aware that they have to conserve watershed forests to ensure the availability water for their paddy rice cultivation and for domestic use. The conservation of watershed forest areas is a long standing practice. Areas which were once used by Hmong to grow opium have been reforested by the villagers. However, over the last 8 years, taro cultivation has changed some areas to permanent fields, although the total area is comparatively small (less than 100 rai). A few fields used to be cultivated in watershed areas belonging to other villages. The village committee has negotiated with the field owners to move to other places citing the reason that if not stopped, farmers from other villages would also use watershed areas which is belong to Huai Poo Loei. Page 55 of 65
The natural resources are not at present over exploited as land use for agricultural practices are quite permanent and cover only a small proportion of the total lowland and upland areas. Rotational cultivation in the uplands with a long fallow still allows time for the forest to regenerate. Although population is naturally increasing, more people are taking up off-farm income generating opportunities, reducing pressure on land. Difficult road conditions, particularly during the wet season, largely prevent outsiders from coming in to exploit natural resources within the village boundary.
2.5 Social equity and wealth
Villagers reported that overall they are now better-off than before 1982 but also classify more households as poor" (see Table 5). The total amount of work is similar; before the work was heavier but for fewer working days, whilst now work is lighter but fore more working days. Women and men share work fairly equally, much as before. Members of the village committee are aware that they have to help the poorest sector in the village. They have already successfully helped drug addicts to detoxify and rehabilitate thus reducing economic loss (12). In allocated land in the irrigated upland area, they have also given priority to those having no paddy fields,
Table 5: Percentage of households in different economic classes
Economic class 1982 1996
N % N %
Well-off 5 25 15 34
Medium 5 25 5 11
Poor 10 50 24 55
Total 20 100 44 100
Source: PRA 1996.
3. Problems and Opportunities
As shown in Table 3, the amount of rice per household is high when compared with the Lisu village of Nam Rin in Nam Lang area. However, even this amount of rice is not sufficient for all year consumption (13) for most households especially those households who cultivate rice in either only paddy fields or upland fields. The size of paddy fields is quite small. Moreover, 5-6 paddy fields owners always face water shortage problem because their fields are located downstream and there is less water in the early rainy season. They have to wait until more rain comes. These fields sometimes cannot be able to cultivated because there is too little water arriving too late. However, use of a ploughing machine (iron buffalo) can help because it can be used to prepare land even when there is little water. There is reportedly some 40-50 rai of land which could be converted to paddy fields. However, the availability of water needs to be further assessed.
The labour requirement for taro fits conveniently with the agricultural calendar for rice which is the main crop. Management of taro is also sophisticated. However, the need to use more external inputs is increasing due to more pests and diseases. Farmers use traditional methods to solve pest, disease and infertile soil problems, mainly by leaving fields in fallow. Some have rotated taro with rice. These methods cannot help in long run since farmers need more land to plant taro. Income from taro production is relatively low and the transportation costs is high since it is a high volume product.
Reserving land for livestock raising is good in that cattle do not disturb cropping areas. However, the use of manure for cropping is made more difficult despite an increasing need for fertilizer especially for cash crop production.
There is potential to consolidate sustainable management of natural resources across the whole tambon since there are only Karen villages which have more or less the same practices. Based on the same culture and experiences in development and farming system, an agreement to have forest conservation areas could be reached more easily than in a tambon where there are many ethnic groups living together. The Karen Network in Northern Thailand has pushed for the right of communities to manage natural resources. An attempt by the TG-HDP to link villages in Tambon Huai Poo Ling to this Network (14) should increase recognition of the importance of forest conservation.
Leadership is very strong with village committee members mainly from important lineages and well-off families. The headman and village committee are open to the changes introduced from outside dating from the time that the KBC started working in the village. The project and RIAs have been highly welcomed by the headman and the committee who have learned to behave in accordance with official protocol. Everybody is supposed to help in community activities and to attend official meetings. Sometime though they complaint that there are too many development activities and meetings and that they have less time for their own work. Many village committee members learned how to praise the support received from RIAs and the project.
In contrast, there is a frequent turn-over of RIA staff. Consequently, there is little development in their understanding of Karen farming systems and land use. Recently in July, provincial officials came and ordered villagers not to cut forest trees. Page 56 of 65
"Development" which has come later than to many -other highland areas, has enabled the Huai Poo Ling people to have time to see examples of the positive and negative aspects of development. Some of their own people have worked or studied elsewhere, outsiders have come to live tin the tambon and the project has taken them out on study tours.
Huai Poo Loei, when compared with most villages in Tambon Huai Poo Ling has changed quite fast, although in comparison with other Karen village sin important watershed, especially the Ping, it has changed very little. However, the improved road condition from Huai Tong since 1994 may facilitate more rapid changes as brokers and local traders can now more easily travel to the area to extend contract farming (15). Besides, the promotion to be an autonomous village since 1995 will enable the village to command higher annual development budgets.
4. Reflections and Strategic Recommendations
The CLM process in Huai Poo Loei has made quite good progress. The project should also consider expanding the process of land use planning and local watershed management to the Tambon level whilst continuing to work with individual villages. When compared with areas where multi-ethnic groups live, Huai Poo Ling Tambon, with single ethnic group, should be easier to plan and collectively implement the planned activities. The Tambon should be empowered to manage their own natural resources and maximize the use of external inputs and mechanisms. In this way, the project should also have more impact.
Support should focus on increasing productivity whilst maintaining the level of stability, sustainability of natural resources and social equity. Annual and perennial cash-crops could be further diversified. Contract farming system, including marketing mechanisms, should be closely monitored to give maximum benefit to the concerned farmers.
Annex 1: Test of Rice Varieties
To increase rice productivity, the TG-HDP has introduced several new rice varieties which were proved in other places to be better than local ones, especially with respect to yield. The project asked villagers to try them first in their own fields and if they proved to be satisfied they could collect the seeds for subsequent cultivation.
Chao Haw, an improved upland rice variety was firstly introduced in 1991 in many villages including Huai Poo Loei. It seemed to give good yield in some plots (averaging 55 tang per rai). In other plots, it has a low germination rate, sometimes turned yellow and did not grow properly. The high altitude and cold weather in the village might also have contributed to unfilled seeds. One farmer tried growing the rice in a paddy field. Its yield was no different from local varieties. In 1996, a few farmers still grew this rice variety and reported quite high yield (50-79 tang per 1 tang of seed with the application of salt to control weeds). They also adjusted the planting time to be earlier to overcome the problem of unfilled seeds. It was found that villagers have not yet applied fertilizer to rice.
"Khao Jao Hom", an improved paddy rice variety was tried by 2 villagers in Huai Poo Loei in 1991. It gave very high yield with 90 tang per rai in the first year and maintained that level in the following years (in 1993, the yield was 80 tang per almost 1 tang of seed). In 1994, the grower gave seeds to 12 farmers in Huai Tong to try there. However, in 1996 nobody continued growing it. A reason given by farmers for not continuing to grow this variety despite its high yield is that it has a hard husk which is difficult to mill.
Seventy three paddy rice varieties which were selected by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) as being suitable to plant in the highlands have been on trial in the village since 1993. One farmer is responsible for planting and taking care of them on his own land. After the harvest in the first year, it was found that only 27 varieties were viable and gave some yield. After the second trial year in 1994, the 7 most promising varieties were selected to plant again in 1995. After the third year trail, only 2 varieties seemed to be promising. They were taken to continue experimenting at Ban San Muang by an HDWU worker. Farmers said that "the rice might not fit with the conditions here but "suitable places" may exist". Reasons given for unsatisfactory properties of the rice are: 1) the rice has a hard husk which is difficult to mill 2) the plants are too tall, have plenty of seeds so they easily lodge when there is a wind and thus are difficult to harvest 3) early ripening leads to birds damage.
Lesson learned: In Huai Poo Loei as well as in other villages in Tambon Huai Poo Ling, each farmer usually grows 2 paddy rice cultivars and 3-8 upland rice cultivars. A diversity of rice cultivars helps to stabilize rice production over years. It reduces risk from pests and diseases. Different lengths to maturity helps to reduce the risk of poor seed set resulting from the cold climate. It also helps farmers to overcome labour constraints since they can gradually harvest each cultivar one by one.
Even before the project introduced new varieties, rice cultivars have been continuously tried and selected over a long period. Farmers have retained rice cultivars which fit best with their bio-physical and socio-cultural characteristics. They might drop least preferable ones and add more preferable ones into their stock of seeds. The result from the project's support in rice variety trials shows that Chao Haw was proved to be satisfactory to some farmers who have continued using it together with other local cultivars. The varieties which were proved successfully in term of high yield (IRRI rice and Khao Jao Hom) but did not pass other criteria could not have a place in the farmers' stock of rice seeds. From this survey, it was also found that some farmers regularly exchange seeds of the same cultivars with from other villages and they found that the yield was improved.
Page 57 of 65
Annex 2: "SWC Plots"
In 1993, four farmers (the headman, Lithu, Lung Yo and Lung Yo's son) expressed their interest to apply the project's introduced soil and water conservation measures (SWC) in one of their plots on a test-run basis. These measures comprised the establishment of pigeon pea/vetiver buffer strips, planting along contour lines, new rice and maize varieties, relay cropping (growing beans after maize) and crop rotation. In fact, during 1990-1991, the KBC had also promoted SWC practices by supporting pigeon pea and leuceana seeds to establish buffer strips to control soil loss and water run-off and ricebean seeds to rotate with rice on a permanently-cultivated plot. However, they did not have enough staff to closely follow up in the field after the initial introduction.
There were no outstanding results from the first year of experimentation. Pigeon pea, vetiver grass and ricebean grew quite well but Chao Haw rice plants, especially in the headman's field, turned yellow. Since most plots were being used for a second time, weed infestation was quite high. In general, farmers noticed that buffer strips helped in preventing soil loss.
Only one farmer, Lung Yo (60+ years old), continues applying SWC measures in his upland rice field. This has been continuous despite of a decrease of rice yield in the second year. IN 1993, 1994, 1995 he got 45, 25 and 45 tang of rice from half a tang of seeds. Weed pressure in the second year was very high so he sprayed water mixed with salt. He found that the grass grew much more than before the spray. Later, he was told that edible salt would not work but a special kind of slat which is sold in Samoeng District is effective. However in 1994, the decrease in rice yield was also common for most farmers. In 1995, Lung Yo tried spraying water mixed with special kind of salt and a small amount of detergent (costing 200 Baht in total) after manually weeded 2 times (before the flowering period). After spraying, he weeded another 2 times. Rice yield increased to the same level as that of the first year. Lung Yo did not think that soil might be compacted due to the spraying because the spray was done only in rice strips which were rotated every year.
Beside the use of herbicide, in 1996 Lung Yo tried to increase soil fertility by applying composted pig and chicken manure. For cattle manure, he mixed with lime first before composted it for 2-3 months. Prior experimentation had shown that applying pure cattle manure directly resulted in more weeds. He believed that the burning of maize and bean residues and vetiver grass leaves also helped to increase soil fertility. Vetiver grass is good in that it does not die when burned. Due to its long root, the grass emerges very fast again during the following rainy season.
Ricebean is planted after maize. It has proved to be a good crop to increase soil fertility and to suppress weeds. Besides, it is demanded by the market in Chiang Mai. In 1996, Lung Yo was able to sell 5 tang of ricebean to a farmer from Khun Yuam at a price of 120 Baht/tang.
Lessons learned: Lung Yo is quite an exceptional person. Unlike other villagers, he does not want to plant taro but rather focuses on subsistence crops. He has actively experimented with new practices and adjusted them over time. He is the only one adopting the introduced SWC measures (which were viewed by other farmers as high labour requirement practices with no clear returns) and developing technologies to solve problems as they occur.
When asked why he continued applying SWC measures, Lung Yo usually answers that he is old so he no longer wants to rotate his fields as traditionally done. It is also his nature that he would like to try new practices. Old age might not be the reason as no other old people followed the same path. But the second reason might be true one.
As observed in other cases, early innovators are usually those who are active, have local wisdom, extensive experiences and wide social networks. More important is that they possess enough resources so that they can afford the risk. In the case of Lung Yo, he was borned in Mae Sarieng and travelled to many places to work for loggers, as a porter in opium caravans, and as a merchant who bought and sold clothes around the areas of Mae Rim, Baw Kaew, Mae Daed Noi and Huai Hee. He cultivated opium for 4 years and was an opium addict for 6 years. Later he got married in Huai Poo Loei. He has a paddy field close to the SWC plot. Most of his rice comes from paddy fields (unlike others, he records a date of rice seeding so that he can transplant in time after exactly 45 days). He no longer has small children. His wife, daughter and son-in-law help him on the farm. His son has a share of the irrigated upland on which during the last dry season, he grew vegetables and got around 300 Baht from sales. Now, he is trying to grow peanuts and plans to follow them with vegetables on the same plot. Besides these, he produces 35 kinds of herbal medicine some of which he sells.
Annex 3: "Management by Control Grazing"
Traditionally, cattle and buffaloes were allowed to graze in the forests during the rainy season, occasionally being rounded up to be checked and given salt. In the dry season, animals were allowed to graze the upland swiddens and paddy land after the rice harvest was completed. During this time, they were more often in the village than during the rainy season. Since the numbers of cattle and buffaloes have substantially increased, diseases are more easily transmitted, animals have often been stolen and have increasingly invaded into cropping areas. Therefore, there has been an attempt to improve the livestock management by having the control areas for grazing.
Under the CLM programme, villagers discussed with TG-HDP and RIA staff to have the "Huai Wai" area fenced for keeping livestock. They also asked for the support with fencing materials from the TG-HDP (120 rolls of barb wire - 100 metres per a roll). Around 1,850 metres length of fences was put up in some parts of the area (cliffs in some areas form natural fences - see sketch map). It is estimated that the size of the fenced areas is about 300 rai. Some 200 livestock belonging to most of the farmers have been kept in this area. They usually come to rest at a stable with roof. However, the stable is not large enough to accommodate all livestock. Some have to stay outside the stable. At the beginning, the committee set up to deal with this activity planned to employ 2 villagers to permanently look after the cattle in the fenced areas but it was found that nobody Page 58 of 65
wanted to do the job. Livestock owners just regularly go there and feed their animals with salt.
Lessons learned: Like many other Karen village, Huai Poo Loei works as a community. Leaders are able to guide villagers in both secular and religious matters. There are no real factions and the social cohesiveness based on kinship structure and close communication exists. Under this condition, it is not much difficult for outsiders to work closely with the village committee to initiate and implement development activities which need collective actions.
This particular activity shows that with common agreement to have a separate area for raising cattle and buffaloes, the conflict between cash areas for cropping and livestock raising is basically resolved. However, the type of group activity cannot always be implemented in standardized ways as outsiders might anticipate; for example the plan at the beginning was to have 2 villagers hired to take care of livestock, to keep records of livestock, to mark every livestock, to sterilize all bulls older than 1 year etc. Group activity has to be gradually developed from the particular socio-cultural and economic conditions of the community.
Annex 4: "Irrigated Communal Plots"
In 1993, the village committee proposed the idea to construct a new irrigation system to draw water from an unused water source to irrigate and upland are and newly established paddy fields. They needed help from the TG-HDP mainly to buy materials which were not available in the area such as pipes and cement. The weir could be constructed mainly with local materials but the normal type of canal could not work as water would run dry. In fact, before this, the HDWU gave some budget to villagers to dig canals which could not be used.
The construction of the irrigation system comprising weir, pipes laid out and 3 water tanks was completed in 1994 with the project's support of construction materials and the LDU's support of technicians who supervised and oversaw the construction by the villagers. Pipe length was 1,057 metres from the weir to the water tanks.
Every household contributed their labour to the construction which took about 30 days. Forty rai of land which can be irrigated has been shared out amongst 40 households (there are 20 water taps).
The project and LDU also supported fruit tree seedlings and seeds for establishing buffer strips. In 1996, almost 50 percent of the area has vetiver buffer strips. More than 1,000 fruit trees or 85 percent of the total fruit trees grown in the village were planted in this area. There are mangoes (477), pears (342), lychees (68), jackfruits (64), lemons (40< apricots (30), longans (29) and guavas (11).
Lessons learned: It is a community strategy to draw support from the project in ways to be most beneficial and have a long term impact. The village leaders foresee that if the road is improved, marketing channels will be widely open and there will be more chance for villagers to produce crops for sale. Annual and perennial crops planted in this irrigated upland can generate more income. The technology used is also an integration between local knowledge (weir construction) and exotic knowledge (use of pipes, water tanks and taps). The organization of intensive labour was also possible because of the unity and cohesiveness of the community. Leaders can mobilize all households' labour to do the hard jobs during the dry season. The headman also though that for those having no paddy fields, this plot can be beneficial as it is irrigated (unlike other upland areas). As it becomes more permanently used this area could become eligible for land titles.
Reflections on the Introduction of a Soil and Water
Conservation Programme in Pang Tong Village, Pang Ma
Pha District, Northern Thailand
by
Prasong Jantakad, Stephen Carson and Hagen Dirksen
SUMMARY
National concerns for environmental degradation in the highlands of northern Thailand led to the Thai-German Highland Development Programme (TG-HDP) promoting a technical package of soil and water conservation (SWC) measures from 1987-90. Free inputs were provided and cash incentives were paid to farmers, into a village fund and to extension workers based on the level of adoption of technical components. Facilitation in gaining citizenship, identity cards and eventually land use rights for the ethnic minority communities concerned were also used as incentives to adoption. Following the active promotion phase, a sustainable farming systems (SFS) approach continued to support the implementation of SWC measures with free inputs and village wide contests. Pang Tong, a relatively remotely located village, has since the beginning of the programme had a high SWC adoption rate. Discussions with farmers indicate that the main reason for adopting SWC measures, particularly the vegetative buffer strips, is to clearly mark permanent agricultural plots to reduce the possibility of Page 59 of 65
the Royal Forest Department carrying out reforestation. The free inputs and cash incentives had also been very instrumental in initially encouraging farmers to undertake the risk of changing their swidden production system and adopt SWC measures. The location of an extension unit near the village also had a substantial positive influence. Following almost 10 years of using SWC measures, the farmers are now quite convinced of their value in reducing soil erosion. However, increased weed and pest problems, especially when growing upland rice, have resulted in farmers modifying the original technical recommendations.
INTRODUCTION
The Thai-German Highland Development Programme (TG-HDP)
The TG-HDP is a long running project which has been implemented in accordance with the Regional Rural Development principles of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ). The project was initiated in 1981 in co- operation with the Thai Office of the Narcotics Control Board (ONCB) with the goal "to improve the standard of living of the highland population, and at the same time maintain a better ecological balance". A 2-year Orientation Phase in Nam Lang, Pang Ma Pha district, Mae Hong Son province, the second TG-HDP target area, commenced in 1982 during which key outputs and activities for a 5 year implementation phase for the forestry and agricultural sectors were defined. These concentrated on strengthening government services to introduce new crops and improved crop varieties to replace opium poppy (Papaver somniferum) and reverse a decline in forest cover. Field activities have always involved a partnership between Responsible Implementing Agencies (RIAs) and TG-HDP with the latter providing planning budgetary? monitoring and training support. Successive project extensions have also encompassed other components, including infrastructure development, health, education, gender, drug abuse control and strengthening of community leadership.
The Highlands -A Changing Environment
Thai government policy concerns in the northern highlands originally focused on issues of national security in sensitive border areas and the cultivation of opium poppy. By the 1980s, integration of ethnic minorities into Thai society, the environmental consequences of traditional swidden practices, poverty alleviation, drug trafficking and drug abuse control successively became important considerations.
Pioneer Swidden Cultivation
clear forest, cultivated 3.-4 years, abandon land and open up new areas main crops: rice, maize and opium no paddy rice production of fruit trees orchards pig, poultry and cattle production village site regularly moved
There are 8 main hilltribe groups represented in Thailand, of which 5 are represented in Pang Ma Pha district. The Lahu, Lisu and Hmong are traditional pioneer swidden cultivators. As permanent settlement and restrictions on forest clearing for cultivation were increasingly encouraged and enforced, these groups have had to modify their traditional land use practices. During the same period, various institutions and projects had established research plots and measured the extend of top soil losses from upland fields, which varied from 50 to 300 tonnes per hectare annually. Various mechanical and cropping measures were experimented with to reduce the magnitude of such losses. As a result, a number of projects and agencies promoted technical packages of measures which emphasised the introduction of sustainable and permanent agricultural cropping systems based on the maintenance of soil fertility.
Financial Support and Incentives
Most projects have routinely provided free inputs as incentives for farmers to experiment with and evaluate new crops and cropping systems. Typically, as with the Thai-Australia HASD 4 project, inputs were provided free for demonstrations carried out on small plots (0.5 - 2.0 rai (5), but for extension onto larger areas the value of inputs received by farmers in their first year of adoption was repaid into village revolving funds. Such funds were established to be managed by a village committee and provide credit for inputs for future seasons.
More recently, the scale of development funding has substantially increased through provincial and district agencies (including the agricultural bank), sub-district organisations and direct allocations for the establishment of village development funds under a national poverty alleviation programme. Altogether, these now provide villagers with several sources of finance for the development of household enterprises.
Extension Approaches
Projects have generally modified their extension approaches and gradually moving away from the extension of technical packages to individual farmers. This has been replaced by consideration of farming systems in consolidated areas, such as mini - or micro - watersheds and increased community involvement in deciding on development priorities and activities with the Page 60 of 65
project role being more the facilitation of community cross-visits and the sharing of experiences.
SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION (SWC) PROGRAMME: 1987-90: PROMOTION PHASE
Aim and Technical Package
The launching of TG-HDP's SWC programme was based on the hypothesis that the sustainability of shifting agriculture was breaking down due to reduced yields caused by soil erosion and declining fertility. Increasing population and decreasing fallow periods were aggravating the problem and without soil erosion control, the ability to have a permanent farming system in the highlands would be remote (Saltzer 1987).
SWC Technical Package
Erosion control measures
contour grass strips as vegetative barriers strip cropping - ground cover provided by crops at different stages of growth. contour planting mulching to reduce water flow and impact zero tillage to reduce soil surface disturbance
Fertility improvement measures:
planting cover crops for 1 year mulching to maintain nutrients in residues application of fertiliser to balance nutrients crop rotation, esp. grain/legume to reduce weeds, pests and diseases planting leguminous trees along grass strips fire control to reduce losses of nutrients
The SWC programme introduced a fixed package of technical recommendations to overcome these problems
The Perceived Final Outcome of the SWC programme was that: by farming land under a SWC system, an average hilltribe family could be completely supported by about 15 rai of land This could be possible only if all the recommendations pertaining to correct implementation were carried out. Use of chemical fertiliser would help maintain yields while soil fertility was built up by undertaking soil improvement activities. Subsistence crops could be rotated with on cropping areas between the strips to provide for self -suficiency and cash crops such as tea and coffee planted along the grass buffer strip would provide the cash income. Grass cut from the buffer strip would provide for cattle rearing. There would be no more need for fallow plots and millions of rai would be able to revert back to forest land as a result (Salzer 1987).
This outlook was strongly supported by public opinion which depicted hilltribe minorities as destroyers of important watershed and forests in northern Thailand and major contributors to downstream effects of uneven seasonal water flows and sedimentation.
Incentive Payments based on Points Assessment System - 1st Year Adopters of Technical
Farmers Package (Adopters received free inputs) Baht
major compliance 1000/rai
medium compliance 500/rai
poor compliance none
Village Committee
per farmer: major compliance (minimum 5 farmers) 500
Extension Workers & Supervisors Page 61 of 65
minimum 2000 metres strip (12 rai) 3000
above 8000 metres strip (50 rai) 15000
In order to extend the technical package a Training - Application (6)Follow-up (TAP) approach was used. A supporting Highland Agricultural Extension Handbook (HAEH) was produced and an Agricultural Training Team (ATT) was formed. The 2 elements of training for extension workers and farmers and intensive field level monitoring of outcomes throughout the annual cropping cycle were particularly emphasised by the project and its staff. Inputs (seed of improved crop and tree varieties, planting material for buffer strips and fertiliser) were provided free to all farmers. In addition, in order to achieve rapid adoption and to compensate for the farmer perceived risk of changing to a new production system, a cash incentive scheme for staff and farmers was introduced based on the degree of compliance with the technical package during the first year of adoption. Promotion was also on the basis that adoption could facilitate the gaining of Thai citizenship and identity cards and the eventual application for and issuance of land use rights.
Results of the SWC Promotion Phase
Implementation of the SWC programme initially achieved impressive results with high farmer participation and effective and co-operative teamwork, especially between extension workers and TG-HDP staff. Various reviews were carried out on the impacts of the programme (Robert et al., 1991; Patanapongsa 1991; Enters 1991; Bourne 1992) which covered a total 60 villages in 2 project areas. Although it was found that these were rather mixed in terms of technical outcomes and farmer understanding, the high adoption rate was considered by all reviewers to have been mainly due to the incentives, particularly those related to citizenship and land use rights for farmers and the cash payments for extension workers, The issues of citizenship and land use rights was considered to have been used by some extension workers to coerce otherwise reluctant farmers into applying the SWC package.
The 3 basic assumptions at the core of the SWC programme were evaluated as follows;
1. High soil erosion and loss of fertility were the main reasons that farmers carried out shifting cultivation. In fact it was the problem of weed control and associated insect pests, particularly in upland rice, that was found to limit yield. Although yields were generally maintained in the SWC plots, this was at least partly due to application of (free) chemical fertiliser supplied by the project.
2. SWC was a proven concept. This was not completely the case in Pang Ma Pha district. Although elements of the package had been evaluated under the controlled conditions of research plots, no actual field testing on farmers fields had taken place prior to launching the promotion phase. The most significant problem for SWC adopters was the particular species of grass grown in the contour erosion control strips. Ruzi grass (Bracharia ruziziensis) had been chosen mainly due to its dense growth habit and prolific seed production. However, it was found that unless carefully managed, it had a tendency to spread into cropping areas and was not palatable for livestock.
3. A high level of farmer participation and a well functioning extension system. Prior to launching the SWC programme, these conditions had not been evident. The incentive system did ensure that this assumption was valid for the duration of the promotion period.
From 1990, the TG-HDP adjusted its core agricultural programme from SWC to Sustainable Farming Systems (SFS). Having demonstrated and extended a model for permanent agriculture, a farming systems perspective was introduced which expanded the focus to include other farming enterprises such as fruit tree orchards, livestock improvement, cash cropping and associated contract farming and the expansion of irrigation infrastructure. This approach included a follow up and consolidation period for farmers to evaluate the SWC package and adopt elements to suit their particular needs. A change in the role of extension workers was also involved, from instructors to facilitators, a transition which some field staff found difficulty in accommodating.
Table 1. Adoption of SWC in 12 Villages in Pang Ma Pha district : 1987-1995
Year Adoption Cancellation Remaining %age Per Village
1987-1990: 300 61 239 14 - 100%
1991-1992: 35 75 199 0-95%
1993: 0 15 184 0 - 95%
1994: 14 0 198 10 - 95%
1995: 61 0 259 15 - 95%
Page 62 of 65
AS can be in Table 1, which shows adoption rates (mainly measured by the installation of buffer strips) in 12 villages in Pang Ma Pha district, many farmers withdrew from the programme both during the promotion period (20.3%) and the immediate 2 year following (27.4%). This was largely due to problems in controlling the Ruzi grass trips and weed competition in upland rice (Oryza sativa). However subsequently, from 1993 to 1995, adoption increased with the total number of adopters exceeding those at the end of the promotion phase. Farmers were able to select alternative buffer strips such as leucaena (Leucaena leucocephala)/pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) and vetiver grass (Vetiveria zizanioides) was being actively promoted in the area by the Department of Land Development. Incentives in the form of free inputs for the buffer strips and some planting material continued to be provided. The project also continued a village wide assessment of land under SWC measures and provided materials such as pressure lamps and study tours for groups of active farmers as an inducement to continue managing their plots. One village which has had a consistently high adoption rate of more than 90 % is Pang Tong.
THE CASE OF PANG TONG VILLAGE
The Village Setting
Pang Tong village is inhabited by the Lahu ethnic minority, who are traditional pioneer swidden cultivators. The original settlement was established in 1975 when several households split away from a nearby village. The population has grown successively from 27 households in 1987, to 34 households in 1992 and 45 households in 1997. Its location is relatively remote, being some 16 kilometres from the main Chiang Mai - Mae Hong Son highway along a track which is barely passable during the dry season. Prior to the mid 1980s there had been contact with the Thai authorities. A non-formal school was established in 1988, a piped water supply system installed in 1989 and the village gained official status in 1990. The village has been considered to have strong and consistent community leadership when compared with other villages in the district.
Most of the information presented in this section results from discussions with village groups and individual farmers in November 1997.
Land Use
The land is Pang Ma Pha district is classified as limestone rock land. The soils have a high clay content and are rated as fertile with medium erosivity. The total village land area is 17,456 rai, with overall land use categorised and managed by the community as follows: watershed protected forest 5,244 rai (30%), general forest 6,970 rai (40%), multi-purpose forest 262 rai (1.5%), permanent cropping area 3,156 rai (18%), fallow rotation 1,250 rai (7.2%), paddy rice 380 rai (0.5%), grazing area 144 rai (0.8%) and residential area 50 rai (0.3%).(7)
Prior to the introduction of the SWC programme in 1987 the villagers mainly cultivated upland rice and opium with small areas of maize (Zea mays) for livestock feed and sesame (sesamum indicum) for the production of oil. They were still not sure whether the village would become a permanent settlement or whether they would be obliged to move to another location sometime in the future. The land use system was mainly open access, with no concept of household ownership. Land was generally left in fallow for 4 - 10 years depending on the soil quality in the particular location. The majority of households did not grow sufficient rice to meet their annual requirements and were dependent on purchasing additional rice with the proceeds from opium sales.
Government Agency Units (1987)
A Hilltribe Welfare Development Centre (HDWC) under the Department of Public Welfare had been established close to the village and an opium suppression unit was previously based at a neighbouring village. The Royal Forest Department had commenced the reforestation of substantial areas (over 3,000 rai) in other villages in the district.
Adoption of the S WC Programme
All households joined the scheme from the first year. The main form of buffer strip introduced was Setaria grass (Setaria anceps), although some farmers were also supplied with Ruzi grass. Use of buffer strips has remained consistently high up to the present time, with only one household reportedly not using SWC measure due to labour constraints. Those farmers who had Ruzi grass buffer strips have generally replaced them with setaria, vetiver or leucaena/pigeon pea. Several farmers have also experimented with pineapple (Ananas comosus), lemon grass (Cymbopogon citratus) and taro (Colocasia esculenta). More than Baht 42,000 was paid into a village fund as part of the incentive for joining the programme in the early years and the village consistently received awards during the area wide competitions for the maintenance of its SWC plots.
Villager`s Views on the SWC Technical Components
Buffer strips are considered the main component of the original package and their principle importance is to clearly mark land as being for permanent agricultural use. Ruzi grass is disliked as being too difficult to control. If the plot is fallowed it has a tendency to take over the whole area. Pineapple strips have been tried but are found to be extensively damaged by rats. Vetiver grass is now the preferred buffer strip, mainly due to its fairly easy maintenance. Use of the strips for livestock feed is not considered important as grazing is mainly free range in forest areas. There is a strong desire to maintain buffer strips and the value of soil erosion control has been clearly demonstrated by higher fertility and yields just above the strip. One farmer actually complained that the terracing effect that has been created on steeper slopes makes it difficult for him to climb up his plot! Page 63 of 65
Legume rotation with cereals has been widely adopted. Red kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), lablab bean (Lablab purpureus), ricebean (Vigna Umbellata) and green bean (Vigna sesquipedalis) (grown on contract for freezing in Chiang Mai), are generally planted after maize is harvested. Whilst red kidney bean and green bean are grown as cash crop, the cover crop qualities of lablab in particular are recognised as being beneficial in terms of enhanced fertility for the following crop. Blackbean (Vigna unguiculata) was tried as a cover crop but seed set was poor was discarded in favour of lablab bean. However, lablab bean is susceptible to livestock damage before it is harvested in the dry season.
Upland rice is grown in a 3 year rotation by a few farmers, whilst most follow a continuous maize/legume annual cropping pattern which has already maintained consistent yields over many years.
Burning is considered necessary as a weed control measure, to reduce pests and diseases and for the release of nutrients from the resulting ash. However, burning is carefully managed to avoid damage to buffer strips and neighbouring plots according to regulations on land management established by the village committee.
Weed competition is the main problem experienced in the SWC plots as annual weeds take over and dominate. Upland rice is particularly affected as establishment and initial ground cover is relatively slow. Weeding times of 20 days (SWC) compared with 5 days (swidden) per household plot were quoted as an indication of the magnitude of the problem. Maize produces early ground cover and competes more effectively with weeds. Salt is commonly sprayed as a herbicide, but farmers understand that long term use of this practice is likely to lead to soil compaction. Leaf spot disease and insect pests which attack the roots of rice plants have also increased on SWC plots. No such build up has occurred with maize. As a consequence of the weed, disease and pest problems, all households that do not have access to irrigated paddy fields have reverted to cultivating upland rice on traditional swidden plots, growing rice for a single year and fallowing for 3 - 7 years.
Mulching takes the form of leaving crop residues in the field until they are routinely burned towards the end of the dry season.
Zero tillage has been found to increase crop yield in upland rice (due to improved moisture retention) but also results in increased weed competition. Mid to late season tillage, for instance when red kidney bean is sown after maize, is considered the most beneficial.
Fertiliser use was found to substantially increase upland rice yields. The seed hills could also be planted closer together and improve early season ground cover. However, since the provision of free fertiliser ceased, farmers have not themselves bought fertiliser to apply to their subsistence crops. They cite the fact that they are not sufficient in rice for consumption and therefore cannot afford to spend money on inputs for a subsistence crop. Tree crops, such as tea (Camellia sinensis), coffee (Coffea arabica) and various fruits have not survived in the SWC plots. At the time of their distribution, farmers did not appreciate their potential value, little maintenance was given and the grass strips tended to smother the seedlings. However, it was expressed that there is now general regret for not having taken more care of the seedlings they were provided, as they have observed that other villages in the district are now gaining substantial benefit from their mature trees.
INCENTIVES
The SWC programme was introduced at a time when the villagers of Pang Tong were increasing their contact with Thai government agencies and pressure was being exerted to cease opium poppy cultivation and the clearing of forest for agricultural production. A sense of permanency in their present location was also starting to take hold. Changes to traditional practices were needed, particularly to substitute for income lost from the sale of opium, part of which was used to purchase rice for consumption. The SWC programme in 1987 clearly offered to the villagers an attractive, albeit risky, alternative.
There is a clear concensus that the main reason for participating in the programme is that the marking of agricultural areas with buffer strips will eliminate or at least reduce any possibility that the Royal Forest Department will claim village land for reforestation.
Initially, this was promoted in the form that adoption would facilitate the gaining of citizenship and the eventual provision of land use rights. However, as most villagers now have Thai identity cards and there have yet to be any cases of land use rights for upland being issued in Pang Ma Pha district, it is this loss for reforestation which remains the paramount motivation for maintaining and expanding SWC areas. The related issue of marking household land ownership within the community has become an important factor as the permanency of the village has been consolidated. Now each household clearly identifies that it (informally) "owns" a number of plots of a certain total area.
Incidentally, the villagers are tending to reduce the fallow period of their swidden upland rice plots, so that large tree growth is restricted and there is therefore no question of them being suspected of clearing mature forest.
The cash incentives were considered very important at a time when income from opium was being forced into decline by poppy field eradication campaigns. These incentives enabled farmers to buy rice and other household necessities. Some farmers received as much as Baht 7,000 over 3 years. Due to its remoteness and poor access, the marketing of alternative cash crops and other products has been more difficult from Pang Tong than other villages in the district. The cash incentives were also regarded as an insurance against the risk of adopting a new system for the first time.
The free inputs were also considered necessary to introduce SWC measures. Without them, farmers considered that they would have been unable to have paid for seeds, seedlings and fertiliser and would have been reluctant to risk their local seed under the new system.
Two noteworthy points have emerged from the free provision of inputs. Firstly, many tree seedlings were provided free, not Page 64 of 65
maintained and allowed to die. Secondly, the value of fertiliser use on upland rice was clearly demonstrated but not continued once farmers were responsible for buying their own fertiliser.
The provision of seed of improved varieties and new crops has facilitated their evaluation and incorporation into the household farming system. Maize has become the dominant crop in the SWC plots and introduced varieties now constitute one of the most important cash crops grown. An improved upland rice variety was preferred when fertiliser was applied, but traditional varieties are generally preferred in the swidden areas.
The value of cash incentives for extension workers is not easy to accurately quantify. Farmers report that they didn't know directly that these incentives existed, although they suspected that something had motivated the high level of activity by the local HDWC officer in promoting the SWC package. Certainly, the co-operation of government field staff with TG-HDP was at its highest during the period that they received cash incentives. In Pang Tong, the case of tree crop promotion can be used for comparison and the question posed whether seedling survival would have been higher had a specific incentive been paid to the extension worker.
The particular HDWC station chief in Pang Tong during the promotion phase was well regarded by the villagers and they expressed their general willingness to follow his advice. Although there is no indication that he used the issue of citizenship or land use rights in a coercive way, the issue of RFD reforestation of fallow land has remained dominant in the minds of the villagers.
The cash incentive payment into a village fund was not considered as a strongly motivating factor for initial adoption. However, the fund has been very useful for the village in buying materials to improve the village water supply system and providing loan funds for productive enterprises for individual farmers. The annual area-wide village competition which continued up to 1993, was considered valuable in providing a formal opportunity for TG -HDP staff, extension workers and farmers to evaluate SWC practices, discuss further modifications and plan the next year's activities. The actual rewards (materials, study tours) were not clearly recollected by the villagers.
CONCLUSIONS
The various reviews of the SWC programme have generally identified Pang Tong as one of the most successful villages in that the SWC measures were almost universally adopted and integrated into the overall agricultural production system. It is interesting to consider what special conditions apply to Pang Tong which have contributed to this situation.
Firstly, the village is relatively isolated, which reduces the range of alternative cash crops, particularly those that are perishable or could be sold along the main highway. Secondly, initial adoption was facilitated by the presence of an extension unit close to village staffed by an officer in whom the villagers had confidence. Thirdly, the village has had effective and consistent community leadership. The situation of opium eradication and the possibility of reforestation were common to other villages in the district.
A fourth factor, the use of the easier to manage Setaria, rather than Ruzi grass also undoubtedly had a significant effect. In other villages, farmers disliked Ruzi grass, which they also complained was itchy to handle and were possibly subject to a degree of coercion from extension workers to adopt and not withdraw from the SWC programme.
There is little doubt that the combination of free inputs and cash incentives was universally attractive to farmers. However, cash incentives for extension staff could in the longer term alienate farmers if a degree of coercion is used as a consequence.
The evidence in Pang Tong village suggests that there was no alienation as all farmers continued to maintain their SWC plots when cash incentives were phased out, in contrast with the situation in many other villages.
Finally, the farmers of Pang Tong have had 10 years to evaluate their adoption of SWC measures. They are now convinced that vegetative buffer strips effect soil erosion control and state that they would maintain them even if they gained land use rights. We can only speculate how much the provision of incentives during the initial promotion phase contributed to this outcome.
REFERENCES
Bourne, W. 1992.
Nam Lang Impact Survey 1992. Internal Paper 165, Thai-German Highland Development Programme, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Enters, T. 1991.
The Transition from Traditional to Sustainable Farming Systems. Inernal Paper 143, Thai-German Highland Development Programme, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Page 65 of 65
Patanapongsa, N. 1991.
A Study of the Problems and Constraints for Farmers to Continue the Participation in the TG-HDP Sustainable Farming System Programme. Internal Paper 135, Thai German Highland Development Programme, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Robert, G.L., Bhandhachat, P., Phochanachai, K., Chunsiri, C. & Sarobol, S. 1991.
Sustainable Farming System TG-HDP Impact Survey, 1990, Internal Paper 142, Thai-German Highland Development Programme, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Salzer, W. 1987.
The TG-HDP Approach Towards Sustainable Agriculture and Soil and Water Conservation in the Hills of Northern Thailand, Internal Paper 80, Thai -German Highland Development Programme, Chiang Mai, Thailand.