Curbing Soil Erosion
An Urgent Need

By Khilendra Basnyat

SOIL, which is a product of biochemical weathering of rocks, is everywhere around us. It is indispensable for the survival of human beings.

In fact, forest vegetation and soil are interrelated. Therefore, any change in forest vegetation may be followed by changes in soil conditions and these changes may have increased sediment loads downstream or on-site consequences such as reduced growth rates in subsequent rotation or cycles.

Since the growing demand for forest products leads to deforestation, the soil is left unprotected. Rainfall rain-off increases leaving inadequate water to percolate downward in order to re-charge aquifers. The increased runoff carries topsoil with it, decreasing land fertility and silting rivers and reservoirs. When firewood becomes scarce, villagers use cow-dung and crop residues as fuel, thereby depriving their fields of necessary nutrients.

When a forest is cleared, the soil becomes loose. Consequently, there is soil erosion.

In reality, soil erosion is a two-phase process comprising the detachment of individual particles from the soil and their transport by erosive agents such as running water and wind. When adequate energy is not available to transport particles a third phase occurs.

Rain-splash is considered the most detaching agent. Due to rain drops striking a bare social surface, soil particles may be thrown through the air over distant places. Continuous exposure to intense rainstorms weakens the soil.

Alternate wetting and drying but also by freezing frost actions does not only break up the soil. In addition, agricultural activities and the trampling of the people and livestock disturb soil. Running water and wind also detach soil particles.

In tropical and semi-sand areas, soil erosion has been considered a hazard allied with agriculture. Its importance has become evident in areas devoted to forestry, transport and recreation.

The impact of erosion is realised in the areas where top soil is removed by water and wind, the subsoil and bedrock exported and the land entrenched by guilies. Also, it is felt in the areas down valleys or downward where the ground is covered with sand.

The increasing population has forced great deforestation for cultivation, for fuel and for settlement. Consequently, the land is over exploited, leading to soil erosion.

The four main rivers of Nepal with over six thousand tributaries carry about two hundred and forty million cubic metres of fertile soil annually into the Bay of Bengal.

The topsoil flushing down into India and Bangladesh is our precious export. As fertile soil slips away, the productive capacity of the hills further declines.

Some of our terraces in the hills have been expertly managed and are relatively stable. Others continue to be cultivated despite their decreasing fertility and still others have reached the point of no return.

Actually, the increase of soil erosion due to combination of interrelated factors, especially population growth, is one of the chief environmental threats in the hills.

In recent times, the incidence of flooding of rivers coming down from the hills has been increasing. It is reported that some of the riverbeds in the tarai are rising from six inches to one foot every year. This not only guarantees a great incidence of floods from even normal volumes of water during the monsoon but also causes the rivers to meander after destroying farms in their courses and poses a great menance to our irrigation structures already completed or at present under construction.

As a result of population growth, cultivation has already been extended on marginal lands and steep slopes, pushing far beyond the physical limits of the land at the cost of green vegetation and forests. The outcomes are landslides and soil erosion. What is more, the sediments washed away from the hills and mountains are deposited at the riverbeds of the plains, making the adjoining fertile land more vulnerable to flood.

Since soil fertility enhances agriculture productivity, decline in fertility affects the whole agrarian system. Our agricultural output has begun to decrease from the decline in soil fertility.

As agriculture is the mainstay of our economy, contributing about forty-two per cent to the gross domestic product and employing over eighty-one per cent of the population, the maintenance of soil fertility deserves high priority.

Most cultivators in the Middle Mountains, who sustained by less than a quarter of hectare of land, added their income by raising livestock. In this zone, forests have deteriorated because of the clearing of forests for cultivation, uncontrolled grazing and the gathering of wood for fuel.

Deforestation on hills leads to serious soil erosion, which further reduces the ability of the land to support an increasing population, and to a decrease in perennial water supplies, thereby reducing the available irrigable land.

In fact, soil depth gets thinner as one goes from south to north. It was discovered that the Siwaliks and mid-hills are more susceptible to erosion. The former has erodible soil whereas the latter is rich in sandy loam with low to high production areas.

There are many degraded areas in watersheds. Soil loss ranges from five to two hundred metric tons per hectare per annum depending on the land use and landforms.

Deforestation along road construction routes also contributed to the loss of topsoil, landslides and adequate water runoff.

The Community Forestry Programme has not only created greenery in the once barren areas but also has reduced the soil erosion to some extent. However, unless the people are educated about the environment and mobilised for conservation such efforts cannot be sustainable.

In reality, in order to grow fruits and tea in hills, there is sufficient rainfall so that very few areas need irrigation. For vegetable cultivation, the valley in hills and also hill slopes are suitable. One can irrigate by drop or sprinkle irrigation for vegetable and fruit cultivation on hills slope. It will help stop soil erosion and landslide.

A casual inspection shows that many areas marked as dense forests have become totally denuded and have suffered either extensive soil-leaching or landslide.

The eight kilometre forest belt (Charkose Jhadi) between the Bhabar range where the hills ended and the plains in the south left preserved during the Rana regime as a filter zone, is now converted into cultivated areas. This has caused further soil erosion. Hence, it has become an urgent need to take stringent steps to curb soil erosion as soon as possible.

Basmati Rice: Who Owns It?

By Gyan Rai

THANKFULLY, the hullabaloo in India and Pakistan over the awarding of patent rights to an American firm for "Basmati" rice by the US Patent and Trademark Office has subsided.

The news—that RicTec, an American firm, has been granted a US patent for "Basmati" rice—not only turned out to be "incorrect" (as per AFP news carried by this daily’s August 24, 2001 issue) but the same firm, as per the USPTO decision earlier this month, was no longer allowed to use the word "basmati" in its patent. Following that decision, the American firm, RicTec, had to change its patent name to "Ricelines Bas 867, RT 1117 and RT 1121". In other words, RicTec was given patent rights for three strains of rice that it had developed.

The hue and cry that followed in the wake of the publication of the "misinterpreted" news by Indian and Pakistani papers was but understandable. Especially from the South Asian point of view. One simple reason being that not only the people of South Asia but also from other regions believe that "Basmati" rice is indigenous to South Asia. No wonder this aromatic variety of rice from South Asia is not only in much demand overseas but also forms a major export commodity of South Asian nations, namely India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and, to some extent, even Nepal.

Secondly, rice, for centuries, has always been one of the staple foods of the people of Asia. From this, what can be surmised is that the cultivation of rice is as ancient as the Asian civilisation itself. Also, that the domestication of the wild varieties of rice, in all probability, started in Asia. As all know by now, Asia in still the home to a mind-boggling variety of rice.

Thirdly, the granting of patent rights to the American firm, RicTec, by the USPTO for the "Basmati" variety of rice could spell a doom to the farmers, rice research centres and exporters of "Basmati" rice of South Asia. For, in the new scheme of global economic regime championed by the now defunct GATT’s new avatar, the WTO (World Trade Organisation), once a patent right for "Basmati" rice is granted to any firm or organisation, then its further cultivation, not to speak of sales, is governed by the clauses incorporated in the IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). This means that the farmers of South Asia, if they want to cultivate "Basmati" rice, have to shell out royalty to the firm or organisation that had patented the right to this variety of rice. Since the number of farmers in South Asia, especially India and Pakistan, runs in the millions, the firm/organisation that had patented the right would be reaping in the "Basmati" moolah. Translated into dollars and cents, it would be worth billions of dollars. That too, each year. And all because it was granted the patent right.

However, this is not to say that nobody has the right to patent a product, item or commodity. Rather, everyone should and must have that right. The more so in this changed global economic and trade regime wherein patent rights will invariably make up one of its foundations. Or, for that matter, one of its most contentious issues in the years to come. For, the moment someone files for a patent right for one particular product, commodity or item, others are bound to file counter-claims. The obvious reason being that his century is noted for, among others, inventions galore. For this, we may have to give due credit to the rapid advancements in science and technology. This, in turn, could lead to ligitations, with the WTO playing the role of a judge, if not a referee.

Be that as it may, the filing for patent rights will be the new fashion or crazy sweeping the world in a matter of years, if not months. Even in this regard, the developing and least developed nations, compared to the developed countries, could be in the receiving end. For, due to the weak economic foundations and strength of the developing and least developed nations, not only are they decades away from building up their scientific and technological base, but the majority of these nations are still heavily dependent on the developed nations for technological tranfers to boost their respective economic developments.

However, being weak economically and technologically does not imply that developing and least developed nations have no assets worth the name to file for patent rights. On the contrary, most of them do have such assets. The "Basmati" variety of rice is a case in point. Had this variety of rice not being indigenous to South Asia, most probably the USPTO would not have had adviced the American firm, RicTec to change the word "Basmati" to "Ricelines" from its three patent rights.

But then, the decision can be said to be a flash in the patent pan because for any firm/organisation to come up with new varieties of "Basmati" rice would mean that it has to make use of the original germplasm. This means that the firm/organisation still has to concede that the new varieties of "Basmati" rice were derived from the original "Basmati" rice indigenous to South Asia.

On the other hand, not all priceless assets of developing and least developed nations seemed to be recognised as such. The patent right granted to a firm not registered in Asia for the derivatives of the "neem" tree is a case in point. As all know, various parts of the "neem" tree were extensively used for medical purposes in Asia for centuries. In fact, the curative properties of the "neem" tree are mentioned in the ancient Ayurvedic system of medicine. Not only this, even in this century, the people of Asia, more particularly of South Asia, are still using the various derivatives of the "neem" tree to cure one or the other disease.

Herein, it would be interesting to watch how that particular firm would be enforcing its patent right concerning the utilisation of the derivatives of the "neem" tree by other nations and peoples. Most probably the firm, to protect its patent right, would knock at the doors of the WTO. And if such nations and peoples are slapped with patent rights suits, they have no one else to blame but themselves. For, what were they doing when that particular firm, despite knowing that some Asian nations and peoples were utilising the various parts of the "neem" tree for medicinal use, filed for patent rights for the "neem" tree’s derivatives?

Conceded, the developing and least developed nations not only lack the resources to keep tab of foreign firms/organisations filing for patent rights but also the manpower and expertise to timely counter such claims. Still, this is not an excuse for them not to protect their invaluable assets. Hence, if developing and least developed nations are to protect their invaluable assets from being patented off by one or the other foreign firm, then it looks to reason for them to put their patent rights act together.