Papers

Socio economic status

3.1. Khadimnagor Beat

3.1.1. Sex, educational qualification and occupation of the respondents and their average family size and earning members

Table.3.1. Average family size and earning member in family with the Sex, Educational qualification and occupation of the respondents

Sex	Avg. Family size	Avg. earning members	Educational Qualification				Occupation
			Illiterate	Primary	Secondary	S.S.C/above	Tea garden worker	Other service holder	House wife
Male 43 (72%)	2.87	1.61	24 (40%)	30 (50%)	4 (6.67%)	2 (3.33%)	40 (67%)	12 (20%)	8 (13%)
Female 17 (28%)	2.95	0.8
Total	5.82	2.41	Total respondent= 60

From the Table.3.1, it is expected that as female are the highest number (2.95 of 5.82) in each family so they will constitute the most in the average earning members (male: 1.61 of 2.41). But they are the least in participating income generation activities. That is, the major portion of the population (women folk constituting most) of the study area does not work due to social restrictions and religious dogmas since very few (3.33%) of the respondents have higher education (S.S.C/above). This poor education is directly correlated with their occupation-standard as most (67%) of the respondents are Tea garden workers.

3.1.2. Religion of the respondents:

Table 3.2: Religion of the respondents

Religion
Hindu	Muslim
55(92%)	5(8%)

Figure.3.1.1: Religion of the respondents

About 92% respondents of study area were Hindu & only 8% were Muslim. The reason is that most of these labors came from Assam of India for working in the tea garden in British period who were Hindu (Table.3.2). The rest is Muslim (8%) whose came from the neighboring places in search of bread and were settled down.

3.1.3. Housing condition and average number of livestock resources of the households

Table.3.3. Housing condition and average number of livestock of the respondents

Housing condition						Average number of livestock resources
Building	Semi building	Tin shed	Bamboo	Mud		Cow	Goat	Pig	Duck/ Chicken	Sheep	Pigeon
1 (1.67%)	11 (18.33 %)	21 (35 %)	13 (21.66 %)	23 (38.33 %)		66 (1.1)	29 (0.48)	2 (0.03)	153 ( 2.55)	7 ( 0.17)	5 (0.83)

From the Table 3.3, it is evident that the people living in the study area posses very poor (1.67% building) housing condition which represents a poor economy. To support their economy they rear different livestock, mostly cow (23%).

3.1.4. Facilities available in the study areas

Table 3.4. Average livelihood facilities in the locality

Electricity	Sanitation	Water source	Health	Education	others
24(40%)	29(48.33%)	34(56.67%)	29(48.33%)	26(43.33%)	1(1.67%)

All the livelihood facilities in the locality are less satisfactory with water source (56.67%), education (43.33%), and electricity (40%), health (48.33%) facilities due to their less awareness about the facility and unwillingness of the tea garden owners (Table 3.4).

3.1.5. Available livelihood activities in the locality

Table.3.5. Available livelihood activities in the locality

Activities	No. of respondents
Fuel wood collection	53(88.33%)
Farming	10(16.67%)
Honey collection	2(3.33%)
Fishing	21(35%)
Bamboo collection	1(1.67%)
Grass collection	17(28.33%)
Vegetable garden	3(5%)
Bamboo base cottage industries	17(28.33%)
Handicrafts	13(21.67%)
Others	2(3.33%)

The highest livelihood activities is the fuel wood collection(88.33%) in study area which is adorned with a diversified number (10) of livelihood activities such as wood collection (88.33%), grass collection (17%) etc because no single livelihood activities can’t meet their demand sufficiently (Table-3.5).

3.1.6. Species availability and their average abundances in the homesteads and reasons of preference

Table.3.6. Homestead species diversity and their relative abundance in the area

Local Name	Scientific name	No. of species (abundance)	Reason for preference
Kanthal	Artocarpus heterophylas	91(1.52)	For fruit and fuel wood
Am	Mangifera indica	45(0.75)	For fruit and timber
Jam	Syzygium grandis	19(0.37)	For fruit and timber
Lemon	Citrus jambhiri	33(0.55)	For fruit only
Banana	Musa sapientum	92(1.53)	For fruit only
Bamboo clump	Bambusa spp	45(0.75)	For bamboo only
Boroi	Zizypus mauritiana	25(0.47)	For fruit only
Jambura	Citrus grandis	34(0.57)	For fruit only
Shupari	Areca catechu	141(2.35)	For fruit and ornamental
Papya	Carica papaya	26(0.43)	For fruit only
Ata	Anona squamosa	11(0.18)	For fruit only
Neem	Azadirachta indica	35(0.58)	For timber and medicine
Mehagoni	Swietenia mahagoni	33(0.55)	For timber only
Chambol	Artocarpus chaplasha	8(0.13)	For timber only
Raintree	Albizia saman	18(0.3)	For timber only
Gamar	Gmelina arborea	11(0.18)	For timber only
Akashmoni	Acacia auriculiformis	58(0.97)	For timber only
Tetul	Tamarindus indica	14(0.23)	For fruit only
Bel	Aegle marmalis	11(0.18)	For fruit only
Shimul	Bombax ceiba	6(0.1)	For timber only
Udol	Sterculia villosa	8(0.13)	For timber only
Horotoki	Terminalia chebula	6(0.1)	For fruit only
Bohera	Terminalia bellerica	7(0.17)	For fruit only
Amra	Spondias mangifera	4(0.07)	For fruit only
Sissoo	Dalbergia sissoo	9(0.15)	For timber only
Guava	Psidium guava	17(0.28)	For fruit only

In the study area, there are about 26 species available in the homesteads of the respondents of the study area. Most of them are fruit species such as Supari (2.35) is the highest, Banana (1.53), Kanthal (1.52) due to having of their less space in home and meet of their nutrition. They plant also bamboo clump (0.75%) for meet up their economic needs in very crisis (Table-3.6).

3.1.11. Sources of planting materials

Table 3.7. Sources of planting materials for homesteads

Sources	No. of respondents
Market	42(70%)
Neighbor	0
Self	14(23.33%)
Others	4(6.67%)

Most of the respondents (70%) collect the planting materials from the market because the tea worker has limited land given by the tea estate owner for planting and regeneration of these species (Table.3.7). Most of the species planting by the respondents are fruit and fast growing species which seedlings are found neither in neighbor house nor in forest (Table.3.7).

3.1.11. Additional skills, capacity, knowledge or expertise of different household members in the study area

Table 3.8. Additional skill of the respondents

Types	Numbers
Handicraft	6(10%)
Driving	7(11.7%)
Tailoring	4(6.7%)
Ceramic industries	2(3.33%)
Bus helper	1(1.66%)
Wielding	1(1.66%)
Day labour	2(3.33%)
Others	11(18.3%)

Very few people in the study area have their extra skill and knowledge. Driving is the highest (11.7%) found skill among the respondents while 1.66% respondents have bus helper and Wielding as their extra skills as most of the worker have to work in the garden up to dark of the day getting no more time and non permission of the NGOs (Table-3.8).

3.1.9. Major livelihood problems in the locality

Table-3.9. Major livelihood problems as per described by the respondents

Types of problems	No. of respondent
Health	16(26.67%)
Low income/low wage	29(48.33%)
Education	17(28.33%)
Electricity	10(13.37%)
Communication	21(35%)
Lack of resources	16(26.67%)
High price of raw materials	20(33.33%)
Fewer income generation	31(51.67%)
Water	15(25%)
Sanitation	34(56.67%)

Figure 3.1.2. Major livelihood problems as per described by the respondents

The study revealed a number of livelihood problems in the locality of which sanitation (56.67%) is the severe one other problem such as fewer income generation (51.67%), Education (28.33%), fewer income generation (51.67%) etc because tea estate owner don’t want to give facility as they (the tea estate owner and upper level officer) think that tea garden workers always want to get more (Figure.3.1.2).

3.1.10. No of respondents entering and forbid into forest and the average duration of being in forest and terms of access in the forest

Table-3.10. No of respondents entering into forest and the average duration and terms of access in the forest

No of respondents entering into forest	Among the people who enters the forest		Average duration (hours/day)
	Terms of access	No of respondents	In dry season	In rainy season
	Conditional	29(48.33%)
	Open access	11(18.33%)
	Shared agreement	0
50(83.33%)	Others	3(5%)	7	4

Table-3.11. Forest department forbid to enter

No. of respondents		Not enter into forest
Not Forbid	Forbid
39	11	10
Total respondent = 60

Among the respondents who had the entrance into the forest, most of them (48.33%) had conditional access to the forest with an average duration of 7 hours in dry season and 4 hours in rainy season. Very few (10) and no respondents were found not to enter in forest and shared agreement to access the forest as these forests are under reserved forest (Table-3.10 and Table-3.11).

3.1.11. Resources collect from the forest:

Table-3.12. Resources collect from the forest

Name of item	No. of respondents
Fuel wood	48(80%)
Bamboo	10(13.67%)
Fruit	3(5%)
Honey	1(1.67%)
NTFP	9(15%)

As other fuel option is costly for them and less amount of fee is given for laboring which impose the most of the respondents (48%) for collecting the fuel wood from forest where most other remains in negligible percentage (Table-3.12).

3.1.12. Materials carry when any one enters into the forest and Pattern of collection of forest products

Table 3.13 Materials carry when any one enters into forest

Items	No. of respondents
Dao	48(80%)
Axe	7(11.67%)
Rope	4(6.67%)
Stick	5(8.33%)

Table-3.14 Pattern of collection of forest products

Pattern of collection	No. of respondents
Shoulder load	48(96%)
Tractor	0
Boat	0
Head	2(4%)

As most of the respondents said that they carry Dao for extracting (Table-3.13) and use the shoulder (Table-3.14) for carrying the resources which indicate the less possibility of felling or taking the big trees from the forests.

3.1.13. Consumption pattern of forest products

Table-3.15. Consumption of forest products

Uses of resources	No. of respondents
Own consumption	25(41.67%)
Selling purposes	22(36.67%)
Both	11(18.33%)

Most of the respondents (41.67%) go to the forest to meet their own daily demand and collect the forest products for own consumption. In season when the workers have no work then some of the respondents go to collect the resources for both own consumption and selling purposes to lead their daily life (Table-3.15).

3.1.14. Average earning by the respondent by selling fuel wood

Table-3.16. Average income of the respondents by selling of fuel wood

Respondent no.	Total income	Average
5	380-400TK	80-85TK

From the 60 respondents about five respondents only answered the question about their income, which is average 80-85tk by selling of fuel wood, which directly indicates the poor economic situation and the medium amount of fuel wood that extracting from the forest (Table-3.16).

3.1.15. Available financial and technical supporting organizations

Table-3.17 Available financial and technical supporting organizations in the area

Name of NGO	No. of respondents
FIVDB	17(28.33%)
BRAC	9(15%)
CARITAS	3(5%)
KID	1(1.67%)
RWD	6(10%)
PASCOB	11(18.33%)
BIRD	7(11.67%)
JOBA	2(3.33%)

Less number of NGOs (8) are found in the study area with their very limited activities where in Sal (Shorea robusta) forest there is 21 in number because all the NGOs are not get the permission from the tea owner estate and very little amount of people are added to the NGOs in order get some financial help which is also returnable with some specific rules and terms (Table 3.17).

3.2. Tilaghar Beat

3.2.1. Educational qualification and occupation of the respondents and their average family size, earning member of the family members

Table.3.18. Educational qualification and occupation of the respondents and their average family size, earning member of the family members

Sex	Avg. Family size	Avg. earning members	Educational Qualification			Occupation
			Illiterate	Primary	S.S.C/ Above	Farmer		Business	Tea worker	Household	Laborer
Male 19 (63%)	3.93	1.60	08 (26%)	15 (50%)	07 (24%)	04 (13%)		05 (16%)	03 (10%)	09 (30%)	09 (30%)
Female 11 (37%)	3.07	0.20
Total	7	1.80	Total Respondents= 30

The average family size of the respondents was 7 and is large in size where males constitute the most (3.93). Therefore, the male constitute the most (1.60) average earning member of each family. From this data, comparison with the male in each family the female are the least in participating income generation activities due to social restrictions and religious dogmas. The most respondents are either illiterate (26%) or had the primary education (50%). This poor education is directly correlated with their occupation-standard. Most (30%) of the respondents are labors and among the respondents women 30% are housewives (Table 3.18).

3.2.2. Sex and religion of the respondents

Table 3.19 Religion of the respondents

Religion
Hindu	Muslim
7(24%)	23(76%)

Figure 3.2.1: Religion of the respondents

About 76% respondents of study area were Muslim because most of them are permanent and they lived here from 2/3 generation ago and maximum are still now live here (Table-3.19).

3.2.3. Housing condition and average number of livestock resources of the households

Table.3.20. Housing condition and average number of livestock of the respondents

Housing condition				Average number of livestock resources
Semi-building	Tin shed	Sun grass/Bamboo	Mud	Cow	Goat	Duck/chicken
8(26%)	10(33%)	4(13%)	8(26%)	1.23	0.53	6.14
Total respondents = 30

The study shows most (33%) of the respondents have tin shed made houses. Housing condition of any area represents the economic condition of the area but why they did not have good housing condition though they have enough money, it is dilemma in study area. The highest average number of duck/chicken and cow shows the economic and nutritional dependency of their households (Table-3.20).

3.2.4. Species availability and their average abundances in the homesteads and reasons of preference

Table-3.21 Homestead species diversity and their relative abundance in the area with reason for preference

Local name Scientific name	Average Abundance	Reason for preference
Supari Areca catechu	1.50	For fruit and ornamental
Am Mangifera indica	0.83	For fruit and timber
Kanthal Artocarpus heterophyllus	8.3	For fruit and timber
Peyara Psidium guajava	1.50	For fruit only
Garjan Dipterocarpus turbinatus	0.75	For timber only
Jam Syzygium cumini	0.43	For fruit and timber
Neem Azadirachta indica	0.40	For timber and medicine
Agor Aquillaria agallocha	0.16	For timber only
Rain tree Albizia saman	1.2	For timber only
Debdaru Polyalthia longifolia	0.1	For timber only
Sal Shorea robusta	0.26	For timber only
Bamboo Bambusa spp	1.50	For fuel wood and house construction
Mahagoni Swientenia mahagoni	3.50	For timber only
Teak Tactona grandis	0.16	For timber only
Narikel Cocos nucifera	3.16	For fruit only
Mangium Acacia mangium	0. 03	For timber and fuel wood

In the study area there are about 16 species available in the homesteads of the respondents of the study area. Most of them are fruit species such as Kanthal is the highest average abundance (8.3), Supari (1.50), Peyara (1.50) etc. The common purpose of planting these species is for fruit to meet of their nutrition (Table-3.21).

3.2.5. Available livelihood activities in the locality

Table-3.22. Available livelihood activities in the locality

Livelihood activities	No of respondents
Agro-farming	4(13%)
Fuel wood collection	17(56%)
Business	5(16%)
Collection of grass	2(6%)
Grocery	4(12%)
Day laborer	17(56%)
Tea worker	3(10%)
Collection of flower	2(6%)

Though found fuel wood collection (56%) are the most but the fuel wood are collected from the outside of the village as most of the houses of rich family had abundant amount of species or also in the two sides of the streets which indicate the little dependency on forest (Table-3.22).

3.2.6. Sources of planting materials

Table-3.23. Sources of planting materials for homesteads:

Sources	No of the respondents
Market	15 (50%)
Neighbor	3 (10%)
Self	11 (36%)
Others	1 (4%)

The trees that the respondents usually plants around their homesteads have different sources of planting materials. Half of the respondents (50%) collect the planting materials from their own sources as they have enough space for planting and regeneration of trees (Table-3.23).

3.2.7. Major livelihood problems in the locality

Fig 3.2.2: Major livelihood problems in the locality

The study reveal a number of livelihood problems in the locality of which few income generation activities (73%) is the severe one because the people cannot get the job according their status and other reason is that they had not enough education for getting the good job (Fig: 3.2.2).

3.2.8. Additional Skills, capacity, knowledge or expertise of different household members in the study area

Table-3.24. Skill of the respondents:

Types	Numbers
Driving	3(10%)
Carpenter	4(13%)

Very few people in the study area have their extra skill and knowledge. The condition is very dissatisfactory and a small barrier to the socio-economic development (Table 3.24).

3.2.9. No of respondents entering into forest, the average duration of being in forest and Terms of access in the forest

Table 3.25 Average duration of being and Terms of access in the forest of the respondents

No.of respondents	Among the people who enters the forest		Average duration (hours/day)
	Terms of access	No. of respondents	Dry season	Rainy season
24(80%)	Conditional	-	03	02
	Open access	24 (100%)
	Shared agreement	-
	Others	-

The study revealed that 80% of the respondents who are non-forest villagers enter into the forest with an average duration of 3 hours in dry season and 2 hours in rainy season for different purposes (Table 3.25). Among the respondents who had the entrance into the forest, all of them (100%) had open access to the forest because the number of respondent was less in number and there was no forest beat officer to observe the area (Table 3.25).

3.2.10. Consumption pattern of forest products

Table-3.26 Consumption pattern of forest products

Uses of resources	No. of respondents
Own consumption	16(66%)
Selling purposes	4(17%)
Both	4(17%)

From the data, it is clearly seen that most of the respondents of the study area collect forest products for their own consumptions (66%) from the outside and adjacent area of the forest. Therefore, it can be conclude that people of the area have less amount of dependency as they meet up only their daily demand (Table-3.26)

3.2.11. Materials carry when any one enters into the forest

Table-3.27 Carry materials when entering the forest

Items	No. of respondents
Dao	24(100%)
Axe	8(37%)
Rope	7(29%)

At the time of collection of forest products, all the people carry Dao (100%) ensure few possibility of cutting the mature trees for collecting the timber (Table 3.27).

3.2.12. Collection of Resources from the forest

Table-3.28 Collection of Resources from the Forest

Name of item	No. of respondents
Fuel wood	24(100%)
Bamboo	14(58%)
Fruit	2(8%)
NTFP	11(45%)

As there is no facility about the supply of gas. Therefore, 100 percent of villagers are depending on fuel wood for either own consumptions or selling purposes (Table-3.28).

3.2.17. Available financial and technical supporting organizations

Table-3.29 Available financial and technical supporting organizations in the locality

Name of the organization	Number of respondents
FIVDB	16(53%)
BRAC	5(17%)
BIRD	6(20%)
ASHA	3(10%)

There were founded by only 4 different financial and technical supporting organizations in the study area i.e. FIVDB, BRAC, BIRD, ASHA etc. Among them FIVDB (53%) was spreading their activities in the root level by distributing loan at lower rate of interest and rising awareness among the poor people to use sanitation, Health and other social welfare activities (Table-3.29).