Subsistence Strategies and Resource Use Among the Santals of Srirampur in Assam
Abstract
The Santals, one of India's largest Indigenous tribal communities, are primarily found in regions of India, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Bhutan. They share a common language and cultural traditions. The study discusses how the Santals use natural resources including bushmeat, often gathered from the forest or densely vegetated areas in Srirampur, the west border of Assam in North-east India. A structured survey and interviews were carried out among 111 residents. The interviewed community depended significantly on the forest, collecting natural resources such as food, medicinal plants, and non-timber forest products (NTFPs). Hunting was prevalent in the community. Hunters were significantly younger (21.54±8.21 years old) than non-hunters (47.96±10.19 years old) and most preferred catapults to traps. Mass hunting occurred occasionally and was mostly done by children for leisure. Birds were the most targeted animals, while frogs and rodents were also hunted. The primary driver for hunting was consumption and bushmeat was not sold in markets. Other hunting includes species of mollusks and fish. The illiterate members of the tribe were not aware of NGO and state-led conservation efforts although they supported them. This study discusses Santal culture, Santal attitudes toward natural resources, and stresses the need for governmental intervention and awareness programs.
References
Aiyadurai, A. 2011. Wildlife Hunting and Conservation in Northeast India: A Need for an Interdisciplinary Understanding. International Journal of Galliformes Conservation 2:61–73. Available at: https://scispace.com/pdf/wildlife-hunting-and-conservation-in-northeast-india-a-need-zif8vo72uc.pdf. Accessed on September 19, 2020.
Arnold, J. E. M., and M. R. Perez. 2001. Can Non-Timber Forest Products Match Tropical Forest Conservation and Development Objectives? Ecological Economics 39:437–447. DOI:10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00236-1.
Assogbadjo A. E., J. T. C. Codjia, B. Sinsin, M. R. M. Ekue, and G. A. Mensah. 2005. Importance of Rodents as a Human Food Source in Benin. Belgian Journal of Zoology 135(Suppl):11–15. Available at: https://biblio.naturalsciences.be/associated_publications/bjz/bibliographic-references/135-1-supplement/volume-135-s1-pp-11-15.pdf . Accessed on October 14, 2020.
Barkat, A. I., F. T. Liza, S. Akter, A. R. Shome, and M. F. Rabbe. 2021. Wildlife Hunting Practices of the Santal and Oraon Communities in Rajshahi, Bangladesh. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13:19484–19491. DOI:11609/jott.7260.13.11.19484-19491.
Brown, D., and A. Williams. 2003. The Case for Bushmeat as a Component of Development Policy: Issues and Challenges. International Forestry Review 5:148–155. DOI:10.1505/IFOR.5.2.148.17414.
Ceppi, S. L., and M. R. Nielsen. 2014. A Comparative Study on Bushmeat Consumption Patterns in Ten Tribes in Tanzania. Tropical Conservation Science 7:272–287. DOI:10.1177/194008291400700208.
Chakravorty, J., S. Ghosh, and V. B. Meyer-Rochow. 2011. Practices of Entomophagy and Entomotherapy by Members of the Nyishi and Galo Tribes, Two Ethnic Groups of the State of Arunachal Pradesh (North-East India). Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 7:1–14. DOI:10.1186/1746-4269-7-5.
Fiedler, L. A. 1990. Rodents as a Food Source. In Vertebrate Pest Conference Proceedings: 14th (1990), edited by L. R. Davis, R. E. Marsh, and D. E. Beadle, pp. 149–155. University of California Davis, Davis, CA. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/vpc14/30/. Accessed on August 17, 2020.
Hilaluddin., R. Kaul., and D. Ghose. 2005. Conservation Implications of wild animal biomass extractions in Northeast India. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation, 28:169–179. DOI:10.32800/abc.2005.28.0169.
Jori, F., D. Edderai, and P. Houben. 2005. Potential of Rodents for Minilivestock in Africa. In Ecological Implications of Mini-livestock; Rodents, Frogs, Snails and Insects for Sustainable Development, edited by M. G. Paoletti, pp. 25–47, Science Publishers, Enfield, NH. Available at: https://publications.cirad.fr/une_notice.php?dk=555161. Accessed on September 23, 2020.
Kaiser, F. G., M. Ranney, T. Hartig, and P.A. Bowler. 1999. Ecological behavior, environmental attitude, and feelings of responsibility for the environment. European Psychologist 4:59–74. DOI:10.1027//1016-9040.4.2.59.
Kaul, R., Hilaluddin, J. S. Jandrotia, and P. J. K. McGowan. 2004. Hunting of Large Mammals and Pheasants in the Western Indian Himalaya. Oryx 9:426–431. DOI:10.1017/S0030605304000808.
Kharel, M., A. Subba and G. Tamang. 2019. Traditional Hunting Tools of Santhal (Satar) Community of Jhapa District, Province No. 1, South-East Nepal. International Journal of Advanved Research in Biological Sciences 6:194–204. DOI:10.22192/ijarbs.2019.06.06.023.
Kinzig, A. P., P.R. Ehrlich, L.J. Alston, K. Arrow, S. Barrett, T.G. Buchman, G.C. Daily, B. Levin, S. Levin, M. Oppenheimer, E. Ostrom, and D. Saari. 2013. Social Norms and Global Environmental Challenges: The Complex Interaction of Behaviors, Values, and Policy. BioScience 63:164–175. DOI:10.1525/bio.2013.63.3.5.
Kothari, C.R. (2004) Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. 2nd Edition, New Age International Publishers, New Delhi.
Lowassa, A., D. Tadie, and A. Fischer. 2012. On the Role of Women in Bushmeat Hunting–Insights from Tanzania and Ethiopia. Journal of Rural Studies 28:622–630. DOI:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.06.002.
Luiselli, L., E. M. Hema, G.H. Segniagbeto, V. Ouattara, E. A. Eniang, M. Di Vittorio. 2019. Understanding the Influence of Non-Wealth Factors in Determining Bushmeat Consumption: Results from Four West African countries. Acta Oecologica 94 :47–56. DOI :10.1016/j.actao.2017.10.002.
Malekani, M., and J. Paulus. 1989. Quelques Aspects de la Consommation du Cricétome, Cricetomys (Rongeurs), par des Populations Zaïroises. Tropicultura 7:141–144. Available at: https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/doaj/07713312/1989/00000007/00000004/art00005;jsessionid=35m8qo3f2phti.x-ic-live-02. Accessed on August 10, 2020.
Mandal, A., T. Adhikary, D. Chakraborty, P. Roy, J. Saha, A. Barman, and P. Saha. 2020. Ethnomedicinal Uses of Plants by Santal Tribe of Alipurduar district, West Bengal, India. Indian Journal of Science and Technology 13:2021–2029. DOI:10.17485/IJST/v13i20.565.
Mavah, G. A., S.M. Funk, B. Child, M.E. Swisher, R. Nasi, and J. E. Fa. 2018. Food and Livelihoods in Park-Adjacent Communities: The Case of the Odzala Kokoua National Park. Biolological Conservation 222:44–51. DOI:10.1016/j.biocon.2018.03.036.
Meyer-Rochow, V. B., K. Megu, and J. Chakravorty. 2015. Rats: If You Can’t Beat Them Eat Them! (Tricks of the Trade Observed Among the Adi and Other North-East Indian Tribals). Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 11:1–12. DOI:10.1186/s13002-015-0034-2.
Mishra, C., M. D. Madhusudan, and A. Datta. 2006. Mammals of the High Altitudes of Western Arunachal Pradesh, Eastern Himalaya: An Assessment of Threats and Conservation Needs. Oryx 40:29–35. DOI:10.1017/S0030605306000032.
Mishra, C., T. R. Shankar Raman, and A. J. T. Johnsingh. 1998. Habitat, Hunting and Conservation of Rupicaprines in Mizoram, Northeast India. Journal-Bombay Natural History Society 95:215–220. Available at: https://archive.org/details/biostor-152501. Accessed on December 20, 2020.
Roychoudhury, N., and K. C. Joshi. 1995. Silkworm Pupae as Human Food. Indian Silk 34:10. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266681952_Silkworm_pupae_as_human_food. Accessed on December 11, 2020.
Sarker, M. A. R. 2014. The Livelihood of the Santals in the Context of Declining CPR in Dinajpur (Doctoral dissertation, BRAC University) Bangladesh, pp. 1–74. Available at https://dspace.bracu.ac.bd/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10361/4952/13372003.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed on July 23, 2020.
Wilcove, D. S., X. Giam, D. P. Edwards, B. Fisher, and L. P. Koh. 2013. Navjot's Nightmare Revisited: Logging, Agriculture, and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 28:531–540. DOI:10.1016/j.tree.2013.04.005.
Wilkie, D. S. and J. F. Carpenter. 1999. Bushmeat Hunting in the Congo Basin: An Assessment of Impacts and Options for Mitigation. Biodiversity & Conservation 8:927–955. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008877309871.
Copyright (c) 2025 Saurabh Mardi, Hilloljyoti Singha
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain ownership of the copyright for their content and grant Ethnobiology Letters (the “Journal”) and the Society of Ethnobiology right of first publication. Authors and the Journal agree that Ethnobiology Letters will publish the article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits others to use, distribute, and reproduce the work non-commercially, provided the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal are properly cited.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
For any reuse or redistribution of a work, users must make clear the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
In publishing with Ethnobiology Letters corresponding authors certify that they are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements. They warrant, on behalf of themselves and their co-authors, that the content is original, has not been formally published, is not under consideration, and does not infringe any existing copyright or any other third party rights. They further warrant that the material contains no matter that is scandalous, obscene, libelous, or otherwise contrary to the law.
Corresponding authors will be given an opportunity to read and correct edited proofs, but if they fail to return such corrections by the date set by the editors, production and publication may proceed without the authors’ approval of the edited proofs.
