forest & tree conservation

22
Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 57 Most people feel kindly disposed to, or even “love” trees, since they pro- vide them with many directly useful resource products. Moreover, they are a habitat for desired fauna; protect watershed lands, streamsides, and springs from erosion; provide shade for humans and their animals; and are a source of aesthetic enjoyment. A util- itarian attitude often results in their being removed in order to convert them into useful material. Other rela- tionships toward trees, however, involving respect, awe, worship or fear, will be referred to as “sacred,” and usually result in tree or forest con- servation and preservation, rather than utilization. Trees, groves, or forests become sacred through a recognition of some kind of power that they express. This power may evoke in us attitudes of worship, awe, or fear (many other emotive feelings have been suggested, but these three span a spectrum which is sufficient for this paper). Sacred individual trees and groups of trees have characterized almost every cul- ture and religion where trees are capa- ble of growing. Even in virtually tree- less deserts, the date palm became the Tree of Life to early Semites and Lawrence S. Hamilton Forest and Tree Conservation Through Metaphysical Constraints Here stands a silent grove black with the shade of oaks; at the sight of it, anyone could say, “There is a spirit here!” — Ovid (Fasti 3. 295-296) Introduction A ll cultures of which I am aware have separate, dedicated, hallowed nat- ural spaces. They may be mountain summits, caverns, headlands, springs, or pools. They are very often single trees, tree groves, or forests. Faulstich (1998) suggests that this reverence and love of natu- ral places be called “geophilia,” and says that we need natural landscapes, not only as terrain, territory and resource, but as cognitive sustenance. Edward O. Wilson (1984) suggests the term “biophilia,”which implies that we have a genet- ic basis for a love of nature. For some traditional cultures, e.g. North American First Nations or aboriginals, all land and water are a sacred environment, as are the associated flora and fauna and the overarching sky. But even among such cul- tures there are special places or manifestations of additional significance. This paper will deal with trees and groups of trees as such manifestations or places of significance.

Upload: votuyen

Post on 11-Feb-2017

233 views

Category:

Documents


4 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 57

Most people feel kindly disposedto, or even “love” trees, since they pro-vide them with many directly usefulresource products. Moreover, they area habitat for desired fauna; protectwatershed lands, streamsides, andsprings from erosion; provide shadefor humans and their animals; and area source of aesthetic enjoyment. A util-itarian attitude often results in theirbeing removed in order to convertthem into useful material. Other rela-tionships toward trees, however,involving respect, awe, worship orfear, will be referred to as “sacred,”and usually result in tree or forest con-

servation and preservation, rather thanutilization.

Trees, groves, or forests becomesacred through a recognition of somekind of power that they express. Thispower may evoke in us attitudes ofworship, awe, or fear (many otheremotive feelings have been suggested,but these three span a spectrum whichis sufficient for this paper). Sacredindividual trees and groups of treeshave characterized almost every cul-ture and religion where trees are capa-ble of growing. Even in virtually tree-less deserts, the date palm became theTree of Life to early Semites and

Lawrence S. Hamilton

Forest and Tree ConservationThrough Metaphysical Constraints

Here stands a silent grove black with the shade of oaks;at the sight of it, anyone could say, “There is a spirit here!”

— Ovid (Fasti 3. 295-296)

Introduction

All cultures of which I am aware have separate, dedicated, hallowed nat-ural spaces. They may be mountain summits, caverns, headlands,springs, or pools. They are very often single trees, tree groves, orforests. Faulstich (1998) suggests that this reverence and love of natu-

ral places be called “geophilia,” and says that we need natural landscapes, notonly as terrain, territory and resource, but as cognitive sustenance. Edward O.Wilson (1984) suggests the term “biophilia,” which implies that we have a genet-ic basis for a love of nature. For some traditional cultures, e.g. North AmericanFirst Nations or aboriginals, all land and water are a sacred environment, as arethe associated flora and fauna and the overarching sky. But even among such cul-tures there are special places or manifestations of additional significance. Thispaper will deal with trees and groups of trees as such manifestations or places ofsignificance.

Page 2: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM58

Assyrians (Altman 1994). To ourancestors who lived closer to the earththan many of us do today, or to tradi-tional societies even now, trees wereoften not only essential providers ofresources, but became powerful sym-bols of fertility, generosity, perma-nence, birth and growth, refuge, heal-ing, strength, energy, beauty, andinspiration. Moreover some speciesand some individual trees or groveswere regarded as cosmic centers, theabodes of gods or powerful spirits(such as dryads), and homes of theancestors. These trees, groves, andwhole forests were protected becauseof these metaphysical aspects, veryoften to the entire exclusion of any uti-lization. However, some were carefullyused for specific purposes, such ascollecting medicinal plants for healingor for repair of a temple or shrine.

Unfortunately, these sacred treeshave all too often been destroyed, inthe name of religion and in the name ofprogress, because they were consid-ered primitive or pagan remnants of aconquered culture. In Guatemala, theMaya-revered kapok tree (Ceiba pen-tandra) is removed in modern landclearing or for construction, though Iknow of one tree which was saved dueto local protest: the road makes astrange diversion around it. In the 8thcentury, the oak of the god Thor atGeismar was cut down by the Christ-ian, St. Boniface; and the Grove ofTrminsul, or Yggdrasil, the UniversalTree, the most sacred place of the Sax-ons, was destroyed at the order ofCharlemagne (Hughes 1991).

Many legends also recount theunfortunate events that often befellthose who did not respect the sanctity

of these trees and groves. My firstencounter with sacred forests, and thestimulus of my interest, occurred inVenezuela in 1974, when I encoun-tered María Lionza. She is the forestgoddess who is depicted astride atapir, and is still worshipped and heldin fear by a rather substantial numberof Venezuelans. The forest abode ofMaría Lionza is tropical rainforest of40,000 ha and has not been enteredfor slash and burn agriculture (conuco)by campesinos because of the diremisfortune that befalls anyone whocuts or burns her trees. The forest wasofficially gazetted in 1960 as the MaríaLionza National Monument and is oneof the best protected areas in theVenezuelan park and reserve system(Hamilton 1976). What follows dealswith metaphysical relationshipsbetween people and nature. The meta-physical constraints providing for treeand forest conservation usually have asa result a long-term utilitarian benefit.They often were “codes of conduct”towards nature—perpetuated by wiseshamans, whether they be ancientseers or witch doctors or modern ethi-cists such as John Muir.

I contend that the more we knowabout these sacred trees, groves, andforests, the better can we understandtheir conservation status, their likelyfuture without intervention, and possi-ble methods of perpetuating their con-servation. In this process a classifica-tion or typology of these would appearhelpful. Such a suggested typologywould include: (1) cosmic species; (2)trees of unusual size, age, or species;(3) historic trees; (4) sacred grovesand temple groves; (5) temple-supportforests; (6) trees and groves of malevo-

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 3: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 59

lence; (7) patterns of landscape har-mony; (8) forests of healing or sanctu-ary; (9) restoration and dedicationforests. It must be noted that these arenot discrete classes, but grade intoeach other, just as groves grade intoforests.

ClassificationCosmic species (trees of life). The

cosmology of many early culturesinvolved a mythical tree which was theaxis of the world, with branches reach-ing far into the heavens and roots pen-etrating into the underworld. Anexcellent discussion of this topic, withexamples from Norse, Russian, Baby-lonian, Indian, Aztec, Mayan, Egypt-ian, Greek, Chinese, and many othercultures has been presented by Alt-man (1994) in a book entitled SacredTrees. He classifies cosmic trees intothree groups: world trees, trees of life,and trees of knowledge. For the pur-poses of this paper these distinctionsare not made, but a few examples willserve to illustrate the metaphysicalrelationship that resulted in the physi-cal species manifestation of these cos-mic trees becoming “no” trees—sorevered that they were strongly pro-tected by the culture involved. Thelife-force aspect is evocatively sum-moned by Mathiessen (1972) in hisbook The Tree Where Man Was Born:

The tree where man was born,according to the Nuer, still stoodwithin man’s memory in the westpart of the south Sudan, and Iimagine a great baobab thrust uplike an old root of life in those wildgrasses that blow forever to thehorizons, and wild man in nakedsilhouette against the first bluesky. That bodeful man of silenceand the past is everywhere inAfrica.

And indeed today in parts ofAfrica, the bodies of certain importantindividuals are placed in the hol-lowed-out trunk of the baobab as acoffin to symbolize the communionbetween the vital forces of the plantgods and the body of the departed(Altman 1994).

In classifying sacred mountains,Bernbaum (1997a) has a category hecalls “mountains as centre”—forexample, Kailas in Tibet and GunungAgung in Bali—as representing thecosmic axis around which the universeis organized. Cosmic species of treeshave some of this same meaning. Themythical Yggdrasil of the Norse wasan ash tree (Fraxinus excelsior), and allash trees took on some of the awe ofthis cosmic tree. The first tree of theworld to the Mayans was the Ceibapentandra, the silk-cotton tree, orbombax. There are many other well-known cosmic species. One of themost revered is the pipal, or bo, tree(Ficus religiosa), whereunder the Bud-dha received enlightenment; conse-quently all pipal trees are consideredholy by Buddhists everywhere. Themythic world tree of the Hindus isrepresented by a banyan (Ficus ben-galensis) which protected the infantLord Krishna. Even today, no Hinduor Buddhist shrine is complete with-out a pipal or banyan tree plantednearby. Moreover, these fine, wide-branching trees have become naturalassembly points for village meetings,community events, and dispensationof justice. All species of Ficus in SouthAsia seem to be revered because oftheir association with various deities(Chandrakanth and Romm 1991). It isof interest to note that biologists have

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 4: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM60

now recognized the importance of thegenus Ficus as a keystone mutualist ofgreat significance to maintaining bio-diversity (especially of frugivorousinsects, birds, and mammals) in tropi-cal forests.

Members of the genus Quercus, theoaks, were trees of life to Greeks andearly northern Europeans. This wasthe tree symbol of Thor, Jupiter, andZeus. It was believed that Zeus couldcommunicate to mortals through theoak tree, and a sacred oracle grove wasprotected at Dodona, Greece (Altman1994). Other cosmic trees have to dowith knowledge or wisdom, one of themost well known being the one whichstood in Christianity’s Garden ofEden and which bore the forbiddenfruit of knowledge of good and evil. Itis thought that the apricot, pomegran-ate, or fig should be the representationof this fruit, even though northernartists and writers have usually depict-ed it as an apple. This is a vast subject,but these few examples will have tosuffice.

Trees of unusual size, age; specialspecies. Unusually powerful patternsin trees, such as old, hoary, spreading-crowned trees, tall, sun-dappledwoodland groves, or dense ancientforest, have always invoked in men andwomen (and even technologically ori-ented people today) a feeling in whichtheir self-importance is at least tem-porarily shed and they feel connectedto some greater context in which theyare embedded. Such trees and grovesbecome objects of awe and are savedfrom the axe (and nowadays from thechainsaw and bulldozer). Perhaps thebanyan tree (Ficus bengalensis), withits strange pattern of aerial roots, is

given special meaning by virtue of itsappearance, large size, and longevity.Certainly today, thousands of visitors(are they “pilgrims”?) come from fardistances to view the famous CurtainFig tree on the Atherton Tableland ofQueensland, Australia, and manytourists in Honolulu wander in awethrough the aerial roots and trunks ofthe fine banyans on the grounds of the`Iolani Palace. But the banyan hasother metaphysical properties thatpromote its conservation whereverHindus live. This is the tree of immor-tality or tree of life (also of love, fertili-ty, protection and healing) and is pro-tected throughout India, Sri Lankaand Nepal.

In the United States, very largetrees, such as the sequoia (Sequoiaden-dron giganteum), or very old trees,such as the bristlecone pine (Pinusaristata), are given protection in manyplaces, including Sequoia NationalPark and the Forest of the AncientBristlecone Pine, respectively. Someindividual trees are named (the Gener-al Sherman sequoia; The Patriarchbristlecone), and seem to commandspecial awe to beholders, who attemptto capture their “essence” on film, orwho, preferably, sit and look in con-templation. Hoary, wide-crowned,stout-branched oaks have, by virtue ofthese characteristics, become reveredand protected. Perhaps for this reason,and also because of its production ofmistletoe the oak was adopted by theDruids as the most sacred tree. One ofthe two famous Druidic oaks (whichsubsequently attained Christian signif-icance as “Gog and Magog”) nearGlastonbury, England, was over 2,000years old and 3.4 m in diameter when

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 5: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 61

cut down finally in 1906 (Altman1994). Oaks also achieved sacrality inother metaphysical terms, as in theoracle grove of Dodona, Greece,where priests and priestesses wouldgo to consult Zeus and hear his mes-sages in the rustling of the wind.

Historic trees. Many significantevents in history have taken placeunder the shade of specific knowntrees, and these trees have taken on asymbolic affection or reverence, asso-ciated with the event that occurredthere. The North American IroquoisConfederacy was founded and nur-tured under a tall white pine (Pinusstrobus) called the Great Tree of Peace,and the trunk symbolized the law andits branches meant shelter and protec-tion for the six nations, or tribes (Alt-

man 1994). When the early Europeancolonists came to America, treatiesand charters were signed under thebranches of large elms and oaks (e.g.,Treaty Elm and Charter Oak), whichwere then preserved as trees of specialsignificance. Their large size and his-torical connections made themrevered until their demise. It is ofinterest to note that their wood wasoften used to make objects of publicimportance, and the “power” keptactive in this manner. Moreover,seedling descendants of many of thesehistoric trees are lovingly planted inpublic and private places to keep thetree spirit alive.

In Central Europe, the most vener-able oak in many towns and villagesbecame the site of justice where the

Forest & Tree Conservation

Figure 1. The Patriarch Tree, a bristlecone pine over 4,000 years old, is protected in a“Forest of the Ancient Bristlecone Pine.” (Photo Lawrence S. Hamilton.)

Page 6: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM62

magistrate sat when he passed judg-ment (Altman 1994), and these treeswere preserved as “justice trees”under which many agreements weremade, involving only the spirit of thetree rather than the presence of alawyer. Altman also writes of the cane-lo or cinnamon tree of the Mapuchepeople of Chile and Argentina, whobelieve that no one can tell a lie underits shade, and all promises made theremust be kept.

Sometimes a grove or forest sym-bolizes a historic event that is hon-ored. A treaty of brotherhood afterlong strife was agreed to in Sikkim in1463 in a forest area called Kabi-longchuk by the Bhutia and Lepchapeoples (Chakraborti and Bose 1995).They reported that as of 1995 nofelling of trees is allowed, and localbelief is that anyone damaging treeswill become sick. There is no grazing.Though small in size (6.5 ha), thealmost total protection has maintaineda rich mix of tree and other plantspecies, including three orchidspecies. Each year the motivation forprotection is strengthened by a broth-erhood ceremony in the grove.

In the water-scarce Canary Islandof El Hierro, a laurel tree (Ocoteafoetens) is commemorated on the coatof arms (and as a taxicab logo) becauseof its long history of capturing cloudwater, and is called the fountain tree,Garoe (Gioda et al. 1995). It was usedby pre-Hispanic populations as awater collector until 1610 when a hur-ricane removed it. “Garoe” meanssacred or holy tree. In memory of thisGaroe, another laurel was planted atthe same place in 1945. Today, this is anew fountain tree producing potable

water for the citizens of El Hierro.Many other fountain trees existaround the world in areas of low rain-fall but having fog which is captured(e.g. Chile, Peru, Oman, Cape Verde).Indeed, in dry country, any tree orcloud forest that supplies water shouldbe revered and conserved.

Sacred groves and temple groves.Almost all ancient peoples of whomwe have knowledge demarcated someareas of forest that held special mean-ing as places of worship. Sir JamesGeorge Frazer in The Golden Bough(1935) has given an elegant account ofthis process and of how “in them noaxe may be laid to any tree, no branchbroken, no firewood gathered, nograss burnt; and animals which havetaken refuge there may not be molest-ed.” In this he alluded to the Kikuyutribe of Africa setting aside groves.Such sacred groves worldwide weresurely our first and best biodiversitypreserves. Gods or goddesses livedtherein, or could be induced to appearor give messages, if the worshippersdanced hard enough, sang wellenough, or prayed enough. In theworlds of ancient Greece and Rome,these special groves (each tree with itsown wood nymph or dryad) wereoften enclosed by stone walls that pro-tected them from grazing animals, andthey were called temenos, a cut-offplace, i.e., a sacred enclosure(Skolimowski, undated). In Latin theterm was “templum,” the original rootof the word “temple.” In these open-air sanctuaries and places of worship,shrines—and, gradually, elaboratetemples—were often constructed, orsacred stones were contained therein.These gave further protection to the

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 7: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 63

surrounding trees, plants, and ani-mals.

There is indeed in Europe a strongvisual connection between sacredgroups of trees and temples. Evans(1901), in his study of the Myceneantree and pillar cult, suggested thatwooden and stone pillars resemblingtree trunks were thought to be able toharbor the souls of sacred trees andthe god or goddess therein. One sus-pects that the Greek temple with itsmyriad stone columns may have beenan architectural way of symbolizing asacred grove (Harrison 1992). Eventhe Gothic cathedrals of Europe withtheir imposing columns may havesymbolic (as trees) as well as architec-tural value. And, conversely, whenimpressed with the lofty trunks oftrees (e.g., a California redwoodgrove), people are prone to talk about“cathedral groves,” and experiencefeelings akin to religious reverence.

Sponsel and Natadecha-Sponsel(1993) pointed out that Buddhist tem-ples in Thailand were often built inforests (wat pa), and by associationthe surrounding forest became sacredspace. These forest temples ranged insize from 0.5 ha to 8 or more ha. Theauthors suggest that there are approxi-mately 37,000 temples in Thailand,almost all of which have a sacred treeor a sacred forest. In some heavilytransformed landscapes, the few natu-ral forest areas remaining are templeforests, as in Lebanon, where theyoccur within monastery walls. Else-where, as in the Western Ghats ofIndia, the sacred groves, although theymay or may not have temples orshrines within, represent the last ves-tiges of wild biodiversity in the land-

scape, since any product removal isreligiously restricted (Gadgil and Var-tak 1976). In one instance, Nair andMohanan (1981) discovered fourthreatened plant species in two sacredgroves in Kerala. Pei Shengji (1993)points out that the temple yards ofBuddhist temples in Yunnan, China,maintain biodiversity of many usefulplants for ritual, edible, or ornamentalpurposes, and has documented thisamazing variety. In the United King-dom, a Living Churchyard programhas developed in recent years toarouse interest in nature conservationin church and chapel yards and ceme-teries (numbering over 20,000 sites inEngland alone). Since most of thesewere carved from ancient forest andmeadows, they often contain plantsnow locally rare, and some of thelargest trees in the environs may befound there.

In Japan, shrine and temple grovesin both the Shinto and Buddhist faithsare extremely common, and Oyado-mari (1990) estimated that the totalarea of shrine groves was 117,300 haas of 1980. She indicated that theseareas not only provide an importantreverential landscape for the shrines ortemples, but that they are used asplaces of festivals and communitygatherings. An old Japanese proverbsays that spirits left alone cast nocurse, and hence these shrine groveswere in the past seldom touched forfear of evil spells. In the urban areas ofJapan today these groves are often theonly green fragment of semi-wildnature in a sea of concrete and stone.

In the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal,where the many sacred groves appearas vegetative islands in an intensively

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 8: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM64

used landscape, like spiritual oases(Mansberger 1991), they usually con-tain unhewn sacred stones represent-ing clan or family ancestral guardiandeities, but sometimes contain shrinesor sculptures. In most cases they arelocated at sites of visual prominence,or the site of a spring or a traditionaltrail crossing or a stream ford. Mans-berger pointed out that they are in situstorehouses of useful plants that areotherwise rare or absent in the valley(150 different species representingone-tenth of all plant species in theValley). He recognized that they arealso important as repositories for reli-gion and culture. In the Khumburegion of Nepal, sacred groves aroundmonasteries and temples are betterpreserved than forests protected bythe Nepali government or in Sagar-matha National Park (Stevens 1993).

Temples have, in some places, pro-moted the planting of trees aroundthem to enhance their spiritual integri-ty and force. This seems to be particu-larly the case with Shinto temples,where awe-inspiring groves of Cryp-tomeria were planted (Oyadomari1990). These entranceway treesinduced an appropriate mood of wor-ship in the temple visitor, even beforeentering the temple. Chandrakanthand Romm (1991) describe how par-ticular species in specific orientationsto one another and to the temple areplanted in Karnataka state, India, as“star,” “zodiac,” and “planet” forests.

Sacred groves, without shrines ortemples, are manifestations of thehuman spirit and human imaginationas abodes of deities or ancestors invery many cultures around the world.Early Greek, Chinese, and Sanskrit

classics attest to their age and univer-sality. The origin of the many sacredgroves and holy forests scattered overthe landscape of India is well recount-ed by Wachtel (1993), who summa-rized the story from the Ramayana.They are supposedly clumps of anHimalayan mountain torn up by themonkey general Hanuman in order tobring sacred medicinal plants to thewounded man-god-king Rama. In fly-ing 3,000 km with the mountain andback (after the healing plants weretaken), bits of mountain and vegeta-tion dropped off and became thesacred groves. These holy forests areoften today still a source of healingplants. In the Coorg district of Kar-nataka state there were at least 600sacred groves of various sizes, rangingfrom a single tree to an area of 40 haand totaling in all at least 4,050 ha(Chandrakanth and Romm 1991).Here local people worship to appeasethe local and family deities and theirancestors.

Sacred groves have been perhapsbest documented and studied in thefield in India and Nepal. MadhavGadgil has been a leader in India indocumenting the raison d’être, distri-bution, and status of the sacred grovesin several regions. He and Vartak(1975) for instance, describe twogroves, one of which is sacred to thegoddess Janni and the other to thegoddess Kalkai. A recently publishedUNESCO-sponsored book, Conserv-ing the Sacred for Biodiversity Man-agement (Ramakrishnan et al. 1998),contains an imposing set of descrip-tions and case studies of sacred grovesin India (plus a few sections on groveselsewhere), and is a welcome and sub-

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 9: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 65

stantial addition to the literature. InNepal, Ingles (1990) has recently sum-marized much of the knowledge anddocumentation of sacred groves andcarried out extensive field study of thepresent management in 26 of them.One of the most interesting studies ofsacred forests has been carried outamong the Dai people of Yunnan insouthern China by Pei Shengji (1993).The hill-top forests here are where thegods and ancestors reside, and anygathering, hunting, wood chopping,or cultivation are strictly taboo, thusprotecting essentially 1.5-2.5% of thetotal area of the prefecture ofXishuangbanna. Indeed, Frazer, in hisgreat work The Golden Bough, givesexamples of sacred groves from everyinhabited continent. Other chapters inthis volume bring into the available lit-erature many new examples of sacredgroves, and moreover indicates theirvalue as reservoirs of biodiversity aswell as places where traditional cultur-al values are reinforced.

Temple-support forests. Also in asense “temple groves,” but susceptibleto harvesting, are those which are setaside as forests dedicated to sustain atemple nearby or its rituals. Such tem-ple-support forests may be managedfor narrowly economic objectives if thetemple needs money (Chandrakanthand Romm 1991). For instance, somein Karnataka, India, are managed tofund temple trusts. In Nepal, the guthiforest is managed to provide forestproducts to a religious center, and vil-lagers refrain from using the forest oth-erwise because it is sinful. Ingles(1990) did an interesting survey andanalysis of the management and condi-tion of religious forests in Nepal, most

of which were of the guthi type ratherthan sacred forest where no harvestingwent on. Products from these forestsincluded wood for use in cremations,for idols, for temple repair, for con-struction of orphanages or schools,and fuelwood for cooking in religiousfestivals. Some forests were harvestedto provide cash for funding temples, orfor performance rituals.

It is of interest to note that theWood Committee of the InternationalCouncil on Monuments and Sites(ICOMOS) has embarked on an his-toric forest preserves project. Thispromotes the use of authentic woodrestoration in temples or other signifi-cant cultural structures, especiallythose associated with World HeritageSites. In order to achieve this, the proj-ect seeks to identify and protect near-by existing groves or forests, or toplant such preserves for the future. Inmany cases these will be de facto tem-ple-support forests, for many of theWorld Heritage structures are reli-gious in nature and constructed withwood.

Trees and groves of malevolence.In many places trees are protected outof a fear of misfortune befalling theperson who injures or cuts the trees,or who otherwise does not treat thetrees circumspectly. Of course, anytree or grove that is the abode of, or isbeloved of, a deity often has penaltiesassociated with any human harm to it.But the essence of the relationship inthese cases is ostensibly one of rever-ence or worship.

Another class is oriented chiefly tothe metaphysical influence of malevo-lence or punishment. The forest ofMaría Lionza in Venezuela, already

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 10: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM66

mentioned, seems to be less a place ofworship than a place where harmbefalls those who disturb this forest,where the goddess roams.

There are many examples of indi-vidual tree species being associatedwith misfortune because the spiritsthat dwell therein are quick to anger ifinsulted. Of course, any sacred treethat was violated brought on penalties.Buddhist monks in Thailand aretoday taking advantage of this phe-nomenon by wrapping important treesin their orange robes so that it is a spir-itual crime to destroy them, thus sav-ing them from the axe or chainsaw—and with them some of the surround-ing forest (Ekachai 1990). But else-where there seems to be somethingalmost like malevolence involved. InEcuador, for instance, the compadrealuvillo tree (Toxicodendron striatum)reportedly imparts a rash to anyonewho does not take off his or her hat ingreeting when passing under thecanopy (McComb 1998, personalcommunication). Also in Ecuador, theCeiba pentandra (a cosmic tree insome places) has within it a small man(a supi) who protects forest fauna.Hunters become confused by thesound of him banging the tree with hisaxe and begin to wander in decreasingspirals toward the tree. When theyreach the tree the supi changes to asnake, a boa, and the hunter is neverseen again (McComb 1998, personalcommunication).

Trembling aspen trees (Populustremuloides) have been consideredbad luck trees by French-Canadianwood cutters. The redbuds or Judastrees (Cercis spp.) are consideredcursed by many, because it was sup-

posedly the tree on which Judas Iscar-iot hanged himself after betrayingJesus. The Basoga people of centralAfrica believe that when any tree is cutdown, the tree spirit is angered andcan cause the death of the tribe’s chiefor a member of his family; a medicineman appeases the tree spirit before thetree is felled (Altman 1994). Thissame metaphysical relationship exist-ed between some trees (especially cot-tonwoods, Populus spp.) and severalNorth American First Nation peoples,and such trees were only cut downafter a ceremony to appease the spirits.I have also heard of a tree of the rain-forest of Ghana and neighboringcountries that has a reputation for evilpower because it is toxic to almost allother plants (presumably throughallelopathy) and creates a mini-desertaround itself. I seek confirmation ofthis and the name of the species(though the one given to me wasOukoybaka aubrevillia).

Some forests have been avoided bypeople due to the real or imaginedpresence of beasts, witches, or evilspirits. While many investigatorsactively seek in remote forests a sightof yeti (Nepal), Sasquatch (westernNorth America), a bigfoot (China),Mapinguari (Brazil), and others suchcreatures elsewhere, many folk shunthese forests out of fear, and theyremain safer from logging and landclearing. Old European legends andfairy tales often depicted gnarled, darkforests where evil spirits lurked—haunted forests. The Grimm brothers’collection of fairy stories out of Ger-many perpetuated for many childrenan attitude that the forest is a place ofenchantment where misfortune or

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 11: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 67

misadventure are common. In Europethese superstitions have largely disap-peared, though in remote areas onestill hears stories of trespassers havingmisadventures or disappearing.

In some villages of Kerala state,India, rattan (Calamus spp.) isthought to be associated with snakes,and since snakes have a strong reli-gious connection, locals do not har-vest the very useful rattan out of fear(Mohanan and Muraleedharan 1988).They do, however, use a tribal groupcalled Ulladans to do the harvesting—and suffer any evil consequences!

In Pohnpei, Micronesia, Pohn-peians have an ambivalent attitudeabout the nanwel (upper wild lands),but the principal one is that of fear ofsupernatural dangers from the enispirits therein (Anson and Raynor1993). While they will enter the nan-wel for short periods to extractresources, they are unwilling to live init. Even when in this forest, they donot call each other by name but shoutin brief animal cries, for fear that an enimay identify that person and lure himor her to some unlucky or disastrousexperience. This belief has slowedmarkedly the rate of conversion of thisupland forest to agroforestry andcropping.

However, just as it is with the weak-ening protection provided by worshipand reverence, fear of the mysteriousand malevolent in nature is being dis-sipated by science and rationalism.Allelopathy seems to be a much moresatisfactory explanation for sparse orno growth around some tree speciesthan is evil emanation. And, increasingtechnology—the power of machines—has overpowered the uneasy feelings

that these trees and forests were betterleft alone.

Patterns of harmony in the land-scape. The human spirit is more tran-quil, and feelings are more kindly,when there is a “fit” or harmonybetween elements in a landscape,including the relationship of humanbuilt environment to the mosaic ofhills and dales, fields and forests—domesticated and wild places. Forests,groves, windbreaks, and even scat-tered trees have important roles herein engendering positive feelingstoward the environment. Where suchtree elements do give harmony, insome places and times, tree landscapeshave been conserved. In particular, theplacement of groves with respect towind direction, water source protec-tion, and aspect has given rise to whathave been termed “spiritual land-scapes” in China. These have devel-oped using geomancy and driven bythe mystical insights of feng shui,which arose as early as the Shengdynasty, 1766-1123 BC (Rossbach1983).

“Feng” (wind) and “shui” (water)were forces to be reckoned with, andwhen these forces were ignored in car-rying out landscape-modifying activi-ties, the human occupants or userssuffered, and when they were harmo-nized, people prospered. Modern-daysoil and water conservation advocatesmight think about adopting some ofthe feng shui approach since theyoften deal with wind and water ero-sion processes and control. Lovelace(1985) described the application offeng shui to the interpretation andmanipulation of landforms, vegeta-tion, and hydrology to ensure the well-

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 12: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM68

being of villagers in South China, andillustrated the concept, which includ-ed the location of a tree grove withrespect to water source, settlement,and grave sites. In many places, thesefeng shui groves constituted the onlysamples of the original native vegeta-tion. These groves became sacred tothe Hakka people, and even todayboth natural and human-made fengshui forests are given the utmost pro-tection as the home of spirits (Ni Gen-jin 1994). The Hakka also realize theimportance of these forests in conserv-ing water and soil and in preventingshallow landslips on the mountainslopes. They believe that the treessecrete natural disinfectants for dis-eases, as well as producing richanions, which are a longevity element.Chandrakanth and Romm (1991) feelthat de facto feng shui patterns are atwork in Vietnam and Nepal. Perhaps itis overdue in the Western world toadopt concepts of landscape harmonyin the conservation of strategic trees,groves, and forests. Perhaps one evensees it in practice, for intuitive ecolog-ical reasons, in some of the splendidforest mosaic landscapes of the UnitedKingdom and elsewhere in Europe.

Forests of healing and sanctu-ary—wilderness. A Buddhist monk,Phra Paisal, was quoted in theBangkok Post as saying:

The forest commands a magi-cal, mind-calming power which isconducive to the meditationprocess. Deep concentrationbecomes easier. When your mindis at peace, life becomes one withsimplicity. This is the first level ofthe relationship between forestsand dhamma. Lack of inner peaceaccounts for a person’s constanthunger for external arousals and

sensory pleasures (Ekachai 1990).

Great religious figures and philoso-phers have gone to the wilderness orthe forest, or contemplated beneathgreat trees, in order to heal a troubledspirit or to find peace and sanctuary.In many cases these places havebecome sacred sites, or, as in the caseof the Buddha, all trees of the speciesunder which he attained enlighten-ment have become sacred. Modernurban people often find the need toturn to trees and wildlands to achieverespite from the noise, pollution,crowds, and stresses of their lives.Forests that provide refuges from thepressures of industrial society arebecoming increasingly important andbeing given protection. A Texas A&MUniversity environmental psycholo-gist has found that even the sight oftrees (in a city) can quickly lower aperson’s blood pressure and relaxmuscle tension and brain wave pat-terns, which indicate reduced stress(Wexler 1998). Even in the mid-1800s, Henry David Thoreau fled toWalden woods to simplify his life;there, partly through what might betermed “forest therapy,” he developedhis extremely moving philosophy.Thoreau wrote in 1851: “From theforest and wilderness come the tonicsand barks which brace mankind”(Thoreau 1893).

In all countries of the world, it isimportant that forest areas of healingand sanctuary be set aside and pro-tected from logging, clearing for con-version to other uses, motorized trav-el, and the noise of technology. Fortu-nately this is being done as govern-ments respond to public clamor forsuch places, and even the private sec-

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 13: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 69

tor has joined in. I regard all of thesedeclared and protected wildernessareas, primitive areas, core zones ofnational parks, and the like as exam-ples of this class of metaphysicallyprotected forest. Perhaps even thenature-tourism sites, though having aneconomic role, may also have someelements of re-creation as well asrecreation. Faulstich (1998) opinesthat nature tourism (one of the fastestgrowing sectors of the global econo-my), however dysfunctional, hasevolved as a means to reconnect uswith the sacred landscapes of our her-itage. While we may dismiss thetourist experience in national parks assomewhat superficial, it reveals thepower of landscape, trees, and wildlifeto reflect the myths of who we are andwhere we belong.

It is this love of nature, and thedesire to maintain as much of it as pos-sible free from the major imprint ofhuman activities, that spawned thewilderness movement in the UnitedStates. This resulted in the establish-ment of a National Wilderness Preser-vation System in 1964. Currently,around 5% of America’s land surfaceis in wilderness status. This movementhas spread to other countries wherethe history, geography, and populationsituation has been favorable for dedi-cating large blocks of forest land aswilderness or strict reserve (e.g.,Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Rus-sia). The core areas of biospherereserves around the world are alsoessentially dedicated to strict protec-tion in order to let natural processesfunction largely uninfluenced byhumans. Such areas often provideforests of healing and sanctuary, as

well as reservoirs of biological diversi-ty and places where evolutionaryprocesses can continue without warp-ing by human action. Currently in theUnited States a network of enthusias-tic groups, highly motivated by “bio-philia” or “geophilia,” but firmly sci-ence-based in conservation biology,are attempting to enlarge and linkexisting wild protected lands intolarge wildland ecosystems and corri-dors. They are united under theumbrella of The Wildlands Projectand are attempting an intriguing,almost spiritual, crusade for wilder-ness recovery. This includes, as anexample, a continuous corridor fromYellowstone National Park inWyoming USA to the Yukon in Cana-da (Wild Earth, undated). This con-cept is gradually spreading to othercountries, as a vision of large species-and gene-conserving ecosystems orbioregions is captured by others. Avision of a more-or-less continuouslinked series of protected areas alongthe Andean Cordillera is being pro-posed by Jose Pedro de Oliveira Costa(Brazil) and Danilo Silva (Ecuador).And, in their wilder moments, JamesThorsell (formerly IUCN’s WorldHeritage advisor) and the author aretalking and writing about a Conserva-tion Corridor of the Americas, fromTierra del Fuego to the Bering Sea. AMesoAmerican Biological Corridor ofconnected wild lands has beenendorsed by the seven Central Ameri-can governments, and would be animportant middle segment of this Cor-ridor of the Americas.

In a paper originally entitled“Wilderness is Where my GenomeLives,” but now in his book Traces of

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 14: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM70

an Omnivore, Paul Sheppard suggeststhat “although we may define our-selves in terms of culture, language,and so on, it is evident that the contextof our being, now as in the past, iswilderness—an environment lackingdomestic plants and animals entirely,and to which, one might say, our geneslook expectantly for those circum-stances which are their optimalambiance” (Sheppard 1996). Indeed,our previously mentioned Thoreausaid: “In wildness is the preservationof the world” (Thoreau, 1893). Evenin landscapes that have been mostlyculturally altered for a long time, thereare wilder places in rough topographyor inaccessible areas where a seekermay find relative solitude and sanctu-ary. And there are still existing some ofthe sacred groves mentioned previous-ly, particularly around water-sourceareas and holy wells.

Spiritual restoration and dedica-tion. Metaphysical forces sometimeswork not only to give sacredness totrees or forests, but to establish newtrees or forests. Some examples of thismay serve to provide some hope in anoverall worrisome picture of thedestruction of holy trees, groves, andforests around the world by increas-ingly secularized human societies.

When one stops to think of it, thisvery day or week many ceremonialtrees are being planted to honor a fineperson, memorialize a loved one, cele-brate a birth or graduation, or com-memorate some other significant per-sonal, community, or national event.In such ceremonies, cuttings (orseedlings grown from seed) fromalready revered trees often are used toperpetuate, in a sense, the spirit of the

tree. In the United States, offspringfrom famous trees are perpetuated andoffered as planting stock for these spe-cial occasions. The American ForestryAssociation is currently offeringdescendants of the George Washing-ton tulip tree (Liriodendron tulip-ifera), for instance.

“Forest monks” are promoting treeplanting in Thailand as a mark ofrespect toward nature and other livingthings (Sponsel and Natadecha-Spon-sel 1993). Pei Shengji (1993) pointsout that the taboo on tree cutting inthe holy hills of the Dai people in Yun-nan (see above) is responsible for themplanting trees for use at lower eleva-tions in fuelwood forests and agro-forests; somewhat of a “spin-off ” fromsacred forests, yet it is reforestationdue to metaphysical constraints.

A recent and excellent example of“sacred” reforestation in India isdescribed by Bernbaum (1997b), whoparticipated in developing the pro-gram together with two Indian scien-tists (Drs. Purohit and Dhyani) andthe chief priest of the Badrinath tem-ple (His Holiness Sri P. ShredharanNamboodari) for degraded slopes andvalleys nearby. Badrinath has been areligious site, regarded by many Hin-dus as the most important pilgrimagesite in the Indian Himalaya, witharound 450,000 pilgrims coming peryear. Badrinath has its name from thesacred badri tree (a juniper), whichwas the form that Lord Vishnu’s wifeLakshmi took to protect him from asnow storm. The first tree plantingceremony in September 1993 resultedin roughly 20,000 seedlings beingblessed by the chief priest and plantedfor religious merit by pilgrims. Pil-

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 15: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 71

grims also provided donations for treecare, and the many beggars who fre-quent such a pilgrimage site receivedcash and food equivalent to their dailybegging earnings, plus religious merit,to care for the trees instead of begging.According to Bernbaum, all agreed.Though there were some problems,both physical and political, with thisfirst planting, the process has beenrepeated and extended in 1996 to sitesat Kedarnath, Tungnath, and Hanu-manchatti, and continues today. Also,the idea of giving pilgrims packages ofblessed tree seeds to take back homeand plant is being tried. Bernbaumlisted the metaphysical reasons thatvarious interviewees gave for plantingtrees as follows: (1) re-establishmentof the ancient sacred forest of Badri-van; (2) sacred plants, herbs, etc.,needed for religious practice; (3) wor-ship and service to a deity (e.g., Hanu-man or Lord Vishnu); (4) religiousduty (dharma); (5) selfless action(karma yoga); and (6) restoration of ahealthy environment as a basis for reli-gious practices and goals. Perhaps thiskind of “religious merit planting”might be replicated in many otherareas where pilgrimage sites exist.

Deterioration ofMetaphysical Protection

In view of the scope of the manymetaphysical influences and forcesgiving protection to trees, groves, andforests, it would seem as though theworld would be clothed in sacred ver-dure. Not so, as we all know. Thealarming rate of loss of forests world-wide has been periodically document-ed by the Food and Agricultural Orga-nization of the United Nations (FAO)

through surveys. Currently the planetis losing forest cover (i.e., totally defor-estation, not just logged and left in for-est) at an annual rate of 13.7 million ha(FAO 1997). Some of these are sacredforests. And though not quantified, weare all aware of single-tree attrition ashouses, roads, parking lots, industries,and so forth remove ancient and evenonce-revered trees in clearing forurban and transportation infrastruc-ture. Trees and groups of trees onceprotected out of reverence, awe, fear,or love are being lost, and with thisdisappears some of our biological andour cultural heritage.

Two major underlying forces seemto me to be responsible for the deteri-oration of sylvan sacrality and othermetaphysical influences conservingtrees and forests (or, as a matter of fact,other sacred spaces as well). Can any-one doubt that there will be awesomepressures for degradation and destruc-tion of these sites in a world which iscurrently adding almost one billionindividuals every 10 years to thehuman population? Moreover, theworld has been in a demographic run-away situation for many decades, andthe impact is compounded by increas-ing per capita consumption or wants,plus a proliferating technology. A sec-ond major force is the more subtle cul-tural changes taking place, largely dueto increasing secularism, materialism,and consumerism. The traditionaltaboos and values of the elders are nolonger held as tightly by each youngergeneration who have been condi-tioned by education, advertising, andentertainment media to put more valueon physical resources and want-satis-faction than on spiritual resources and

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 16: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM72

ethical conservation. This is not trueeverywhere, of course, but it is an all-too-common syndrome in traditionalcultures that have long been the custo-dians of sacred or taboo trees andforests.

Unfortunately, the economic devel-opment aid being extended to devel-oping countries emphasizes naturalresource management for commodi-ties, energy intensive technology, cashcropping for export earnings, privati-zation, and global markets. Theseimperatives tend to ignore or rideroughshod over subtle forces that pro-tect forests. In the past, proselytizingby organized religions of the Westernworld often resulted in so-called pagansacred groves being deliberatelydestroyed and their metaphysical pro-tection denounced as either sillysuperstition or worship of false gods.

In a study of 660 sacred forestsamong the Zigna ethnic group in Tan-zania, Mwihomeke et al. (1997) foundthat, on average, only 60% were intactor only slightly disturbed. They foundthat the main causes for destruction inthe remainder were clearing for farm-ing and overharvesting for buildingpoles, timber, and fuelwood. Theyalso found that the most numerousinstances of destruction occurredwhere there was a high influx of immi-grants from outside the village area.Similarly, in the Western Ghats ofIndia taboos were increasingly violat-ed under extreme duress, or by out-siders (Gadgil and Vartak 1976). InThailand, Taylor (1991) indicatedthat forest monks find it necessary notto wander the country, but to stay putto protect forests in the Northeast, forwhen they are absent the resource-

hungry villagers often exploit the for-est. In Nepal, the detailed study byIngles (1990) found significant modi-fication and degradation of understoryvegetation and soils due to grazing ,even though there might still be sanc-tions on tree cutting that limit it to reli-gious purposes. The same general sit-uation of deterioration comes inreports from Pacific islands, Malaysia,Philippines, and central Africa.

Governments seem to have littleconcern for the conservation of thesespecial forests or trees, and in develop-ing or developed countries alike it isoften only the confrontational actionsof concerned locals or preservation-minded nongovernmental organiza-tions that save them from the grind-stones of economic development. Agreat decline in the sacred forest estatetook place when European colonialadministrations took charge of whathad been “unowned” forest land inspite of a long history of traditionaloccupancy and use. These administra-tions put forests into managed unitsfor timber resource production, andsacred forests frequently lost theiridentity as they were incorporated intoproduction forests or into areas ear-marked for plantation estate develop-ment. Basically the same processoccurred in many newly-independent(from colonial rule) nations, wheregovernments claimed all land to whichno clear private title existed. To earnfunds for their nascent economies,logging concessions were granted toforeign companies, and these produc-tion areas ignored any special religioussites in these forests. They also fos-tered large land clearing and settle-ment schemes that ignored sacred

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 17: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 73

trees, groves, or forests.Even in this climate of pro-develop-

ment, however, metaphysical attitudesof reverence for trees broke out inmany places as confrontation withgovernments. One of the most inter-esting of these was the Chipko Move-ment, carried out largely by womenwho hugged trees in the GarhwalHimalaya (India) to prevent theirbeing commercially logged. While themost direct motivation was ecologicaland utilitarian, the movement derivedmuch of its force from spiritual lead-ers, especially from the philosopherSunderlal Bahuguna and the Chipkopoet Ghanashyam Raturi. An accountof this interesting phenomenon, itsevolution, and impact was given byShiva and Bandyopadhyay (1986).This process was emulated in NewZealand by the Native Forest ActionCouncil a few years later by conserva-tion activists, who climbed trees andstayed aloft for days and weeks to pre-vent these special native old growthforests being harvested. Tree perchingand tree-top living is currently in effectin some old- growth forests of thewestern United States, to protect whatare being almost religiously called“ancient forests.”

Biodiversity and CulturalDiversity Conservation:

Some SuggestionsSeveral years ago I asserted to the

natural science community in thePacific that the application of moreecological science will not halt theserious loss of genes, species, andecosystems; nor will more recycling orapplication of more pollution controltechnology and so forth. It is not the

ecologists, engineers, economists, orearth scientists who will save our biot-ic component of spaceship earth, butthe poets, priests, artists, and philoso-phers (Hamilton 1993). It is this lattergroup that deal with the human emo-tions, attitudes, and thoughts thatvibrate between humans and their bio-physical environment. In the face ofthe destruction and deterioration ofthe sacred trees and groups of treesjust discussed, due partly to thechanged sacrality of nature as oldermores, taboos, ceremonies, and beliefsystems increasingly lose their power,we need to turn to the fields of ethics,values, and religion, rather than to sci-ence and technology, for increasingour conservation of biodiversity.There are at least eight arenas of hope,or suggestions for strengthening meta-physical tree and forest conservation.

1. Let me commence with a West-ern science-dictated task: inventory.Heinen (1994) suggested locating allexisting sacred forests in the mid-hillsof Nepal in a geographic informationsystem (GIS) to permit landscape-level analysis as to their regional extentand position with respect to eachother and with other types of parksand preserves. An inventory of allsacred trees and groves in Nepal’sKathmandu Valley was conducted byMansberger (1991), who speculatedabout a pilgrimage trail that mighteven be used by ecotourists so thatthey become an economic asset to thearea as a means of increasing their pro-tection. In addition to location andmapping, inventory of their biologicalcomponents of groves and forestswould reveal something of their biodi-versity importance. Ingles (1990) sur-

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 18: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM74

veyed 26 religious forests in centralNepal, obtaining physical, biotic, andsocial information, with emphasis onhow they were managed to fulfill theirvarious purposes. Gadgil and Vartak(1976) and Chakraborti and Bose(1995) have likewise conductedfocused studies in India that provideinformation on the biological and reli-gious values of such sites. The recentbook by Ramakrishnan et al. (1998)has an excellent documentation ofmany sacred groves, particularly inIndia, and often relates these to biodi-versity conservation.

Much more inventory and identifi-cation of sacred sites is needed so thatsuch places of in situ genetic and spir-itual conservation can be incorporatedinto national protected area planning.Even small groves, which have limitedvalue in preserving biodiversity due tothe “small-island syndrome” ofspecies loss, can still serve as “arbore-ta” that can maintain precious seedstock and germplasm of some species,both plant and animal, through strictprotection or proactive conservationmanagement. Bio-inventories areneeded not only in the aforemen-tioned sacred groves and forests but inchurchyards, monastery properties,and lands associated with any otherreligious structures. This is especiallyneeded in strongly transformed land-scapes, such as the Mediterraneanregion, Western and Central Europe,parts of China, and the African low-lands.

It is nevertheless extremely impor-tant to recognize that many sacredtrees, groves, and forests may be“secret” sites whose spiritual meaningis diminished or threatened by having

them known and listed. They mayindeed often be better protected instrong traditional cultures if they arenot on a roster. Visitation by “out-siders” usually accompanies the mak-ing known of such revered trees,groves, or forests—as has happened sooften with other kinds of sacred placessuch as mountains, water bodies, orthe habitat of sacred animals. Suchinventory and listing may have bene-fits, however, if a tree or forestbecomes threatened with destructionby outside forces that may be operat-ing in ignorance or in venality. It isimperative that the traditional custodi-ans of such trees or sites decidewhether or not the dangers outweighthe benefits, and that no inventory andlocation data are obtained and usedwithout their full concurrence.

2. Secular society should supportand reinforce the sacrality of siteswhere biodiversity and cultural diver-sity are fostered by the protectionafforded by metaphysical forces. In thecase of sacred groves and forests, sure-ly such sites should be recognized asto their value and be given secularlegal protection such as that affordedto national parks, national monu-ments, and other types of official pro-tected areas. This was exactly the pro-cedure adopted by Venezuela in thecase of the sacred forest of María Lion-za, which became a national monu-ment in the country’s system of parksand preserves (Hamilton 1976). Andin 1990, the parliament of Kenyavoted to protect all of the remainingkaya forests that have survived onlybecause of the beliefs of village elderswho respect them as sacred forests(Negussie 1998). Again, however,

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 19: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 75

such secular protection must be onlywith the concurrence of the traditionalcustodians.

3. Contemporary societies at local,regional, or national levels should per-petuate, not discourage, local folk-songs, stories, legends, rituals, and fes-tivals dealing with trees and forests, toreinforce with younger generationstheir bond to the biological world,once strongly recognized and “lived”by the older generations. Public sup-port of such traditions, support of folkart in nature, and other incentives canplay a role in decreasing the rate oferosion of these traditional values.

4. The section of this paper onrestoration and dedication suggestssome positive actions that can result innew forests that can heal the earth,providing incipient loci for both bio-diversity and cultural diversity conser-vation. A holy mission to establishnew groves, forests, or even individualtrees can be engendered not only bypriestly blessing and urging as atBadrinath, but by laypersons imbuedwith a zealousness for repairingdenuded landscapes. Organizationssuch as Men of the Trees, books suchas The Man Who Planted Trees, andregreening programs have, largely byinspiring ardor, resulted in countlessnumbers of trees being planted. In thisdeforested world, the healing conceptsof restoration, repair, and rehabilita-tion have an emotional appeal onwhich we have not yet capitalized. Isuggested to the U.N. EnvironmentProgram’s executive director prior tothe 1992 Earth Summit that an appro-priate theme might be the “Three R’s”of the last sentence, and the motto“Healing the Earth.” Somehow it lost

out to “Sustainable Development.”I’m still hoping that the concept ofrestoration will capture the imagina-tion and support of those mysterious“decision-makers.” In such a program,the metaphysical aspects of trees,groves, and forests should play a majorpart.

5. In the technical and financial aidprograms from the so-called devel-oped countries to the developingcountries, projects should be designedthat foster the aforementioned aspectsof sustainable development that sup-port or restore sacrality. At a mini-mum, they should be scrutinized toremove aspects that weaken culturaland religious ties to land. This hasdecidedly not been the case in thepast. The high-tech packages, promot-ing rapid economic development, cashagriculture, monocultures, globaleconomies, and so forth, have all tend-ed to weaken the traditional culturalvalues that have promoted strongnature–human relations, includingrespect and reverence.

6. In the field of religious proselyti-zation, missionaries, particularly fromChristian churches, have in the pastmostly tried to root out so-calledpagan feelings of sacrality towardtrees, groves, and other elements ofnature. Even today, absolute dominionover the natural world is preached byseveral religious groups who areactively seeking conversions amongthe “heathen.” Fortunately, there is anencouraging movement among manyorganized religions of the world tocome together in an ecumenical cam-paign for a gentler, healing approachto nature. Fifty religious institutionsbanded together and transmitted a

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 20: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM76

common proposal on respect fornature to the 1992 Earth Summit inRio de Janeiro (Hamilton 1993). Peri-odically there are ecumenical gather-ings and joint statements from theworld’s nine principal religions andothers, based on the St. Francis ofAssisi attitude toward nature, and aSummit on Religions and Conserva-tion was held in 1995. An Alliance ofReligion and Conservation has grownout of this; its newsletter, the first issueof which appeared in spring 1997,contained an article on “Saving thePilgrimage Forests of Krishna.” Thealliance has stimulated an excitingSacred Land Project in the UnitedKingdom, the largest religious cam-paign on ecology ever undertakenthere (Sacred Land 1997). In thisproject, ancient woodlands belongingto historical monuments, abbeys, andchurches will be protected, managed,and, where necessary, replanted.There are encouraging signs thatorganized religions are taking steps touse their metaphysical influence toachieve forest conservation.

Another good example was a proj-ect developed by Thai and Tibetanmonks and Thai researchers called“Buddhist Perception of Nature,” ini-tiated in 1985 (Nash 1986). This proj-ect continues as a quiet force, assem-bling teachings about humankind’sinterdependence with nature and pro-ducing educational materials that pro-mote environmental ethics andchanged attitudes about forestdestruction.

7. A hopeful sign comes from theWood Committee of ICOMOS, and itcould well be adopted by govern-ments, foundations, or other organiza-

tions. It is based on the need to supplyauthentic restoration for World Her-itage Sites containing wood. To beauthentic for repair and replacement,the wood should be of the samespecies and with the same characteris-tics as the original wood (often large,old-growth trees or trees of specificshape or grain). The Historic ForestReserves project attempts to locatefeasible existing forests or groves thatcould supply such material for each ofthe World Heritage structures and givethem whatever protection is needed,or to establish new forests or enrich-ment-planting forests that could sup-ply material for historic wooden struc-tures. This intriguing program inmany cases can build on existing tem-ple forests or temple-support forestspreviously described in this paper, forsome of these temples indeed areWorld Heritage Sites or potential sites.But the project looks to a future wherehistorically correct wood may not beconveniently available and proposes tostart action now. Such a programcould well be expanded beyond WorldHeritage Sites so that all historicallyvaluable wooden structures have anearby protected source of supplyfrom which authentic restoration cancarried out. This is as needed inFrance or Japan as it is in Nepal orTanzania.

8. Finally, a promising program hasdeveloped in the U.N. Educational,Scientific, and Cultural Organization(UNESCO) on “Sacred Sites andEnvironmental Conservation.” It wasstarted with a pilot project in Ghanaand is being extended to other sites.This gives long overdue recognitioninternationally to the de facto protec-

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 21: Forest & Tree Conservation

Volume 19 • Number 3 2002 77

tion that has existed through meta-physical constraints or processes.

ConclusionNeeded in all countries of the

world is the sense of place that bringsus back into a community with trees,wildlife, streams, mountains—withnature. We may call some places“sacred forests,” “ancient cathedralgroves,” “friendly retreats,” or “wildsanctuaries,” or even have a favoritetree that we hug. We need these.Sochaczewski (1998) calls them “lifereserves,” and it is an apt name, forthey can greatly enhance human life,

and conserve biodiversity. Forestersand other natural scientists should notfeel embarrassed or reluctant to talkabout metaphysical matters, becausebiodiversity and cultural conservationmay be greatly enhanced by the meta-physical. It will not be the natural sci-entists that achieve that blessed stateof “forest conservation,” but the poets,priests, artists and philosophers whoinfluence human behavior (Hamilton1993). Foresters and biologists, how-ever, must be engaged in the dialogueto bring sound natural science into thediscourse arena.

[Ed. note: This paper was originally presented at the International Symposium onNatural Sacred Sites—Cultural Diversity and Biological Diversity Conservation, 22-25September 1998, UNESCO, Paris, and was revised in 2000.]

ReferencesAltman, N. 1994. Sacred Trees. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Anson, H., and W. Raynor. 1993. Traditional resource management and the conservation of biological

diversity on Pohnpei Island, Federated States of Micronesia. In Ethics, Religion, and Biodiversity. L.S.Hamilton, ed. Cambridge, U.K.: White Horse Press, 133-146.

Bernbaum, E. 1997a. The spiritual and cultural significance of mountains. In Mountains of the World: AGlobal Priority. B. Messerli and J. Ives, eds. New York and London: Parthenon, 39-60.

———. 1997b. Pilgrimage and conservation in the Himalayas: a model for environmental action based oncultural and spiritual values. Project report. Franklin, W. Va.: The Mountain Institute.

Chakraborti, D., and B. Bose. 1995. Studies on “Sacred Groves” in Bihar, Sikkim, and West Bengal.Calcutta: Jadavpur University.

Chandrakanth, M.G., and J. Romm. 1991. Sacred forests, secular forest policies and people’s actions.Natural Resources Journal 31:4, 741-755.

Ekachai, S. 1990. Holy war on illegal loggers. Bangkok Post, 13 August.Evans, A. 1901. Mycenaean tree and pillar cult. Journal of Hellenistic Studies 21, 1-103.FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations]. 1997. State of the World’s Forests 1997.

Rome: FAO.Faulstich, P. 1998. Geophilia. Wild Earth 8:1, 81-89.Frazer, J. G. 1935. The Golden Bough. New York: Macmillan.Gadgil, M., and V.D. Vartak. 1975. Sacred groves of India—a plea for continued conservation. Journal of

the Bombay Natural History Society 72:2, 314-320.———. 1976. The sacred groves of Western Ghats in India. Economic Botany 30, 152-160.Gioda, A., J. Maley, R.E. Guasp, and A.A. Baladon. 1995. Some low elevation fog forests of dry environ-

ments: applications to African paleoenvironments. In Tropical Montane Cloud Forests. L.S. Hamilton,J.O. Juvik, and F.N. Scatena, eds. New York: Springer-Verlag, 156-164.

Hamilton, L.S. 1976. Tropical Rainforest Use and Preservation: A Study of Problems and Practices inVenezuela. San Francisco: Sierra Club.

———, ed. 1993. Ethics, Religion, and Biodiversity. Cambridge, U.K.: White Horse Press.Harrison, R.G. 1992. Forests: The Shadow of Civilization. Chicago and London: University of Chicago

Press.Heinen, J. 1994. Agenda for sacred forests. Habitat Himalaya 2:1, 2-4.Hughes, J.D. 1991. Spirit of place in the Western World. In The Power of Place. J.A. Swan, ed. Wheaton,

Ill.: Quest, 15-27.

Forest & Tree Conservation

Page 22: Forest & Tree Conservation

The George Wright FORUM78

Ingles, A.W. 1990. The Management of Religious Forests in Nepal. Department of Forestry ResearchReport. Canberra: Australian National University.

Lovelace, G.W. 1985. Man, land and mind in early historic Hong Kong. In Cultural Values and HumanEcology in Southeast Asia. K.L. Hutterer, A.T. Rambo, and G. Lovelace, eds. Michigan Papers on Southand Southeast Asia no. 27. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 341-372.

Mansberger, J.R. 1991. Ban Yatra: a biocultural survey of sacred forests in Kathmandu Valley. Ph.D. dis-sertation. University of Hawai`i, Honolulu.

Mathiessen, P. 1972. The Tree Where Man Was Born: The African Experience. New York: Dutton.McComb, M. 1998. Personal communication from executive director of Maquipucuna Foundation, Quito,

Ecuador.Mohanan, C., and P.K. Muraleedharan. 1988. Rattan resources in the sacred groves of Kerala, India. Rattan

Information Centre Bulletin 7:3/4, 4-5.Mwihomeke, S.T., T.H. Msangi, and J. Yihaisi. 1997. Quantity, distribution and current status of sacred

forests in the Ziqua ethnic group, Handeni District. The Arc Journal (Tanzania) 6, 2.Nair, N.C., and C.N. Mohanan. 1981. On the rediscovery of four threatened species from the sacred groves

of Kerala. Journal of Economic Taxonomy and Botany 2, 233-235.Nash, N. 1986. Letter from Puttha Monton. Far Eastern Economic Review, 15 May, 106.Negussie, G. 1998. Sacred forests in Kenya. ArborVitae (IUCN/WWF) 6, 15.Ni Genjin. 1994. Hakka “fengshui forests”: their preservation and value. Forestry and Society Newsletter

2:2, 6.Oyadomari, M. 1990. Cultural perception of nature and its application toward preserving cultural and nat-

ural heritage in Japan. Unpublished paper. Tokyo: Chiba National University.Pei Shengji. 1993. Managing for biological diversity in temple yards and holy hills: the traditional practices

of the Xishuangbanna Dai community, southwest China. In Ethics, Religion, and Biodiversity. L.S.Hamilton, ed. Cambridge, U.K.: White Horse Press, 118-132.

Ramakrishnan, P.S., K.G. Saxena, and U.M. Chandrashekara, eds. 1998. Conserving the Sacred forBiodiversity Management. Enfield, N.H.: Science Publishers.

Rossback, S. 1983. Feng Shui. London: Hutchinson.Sacred Land. 1997. Issue no. 1 of The Sacred Land Project. International Consultancy on Religion,

Education and Culture, Manchester, U.K.Schaaf, T. 1998. Personal communication, and workshop held 24-25 September 1998 on developing an

UNESCO project on Sacred Sites—Cultural Integrity and Biological Diversity, Paris.Sheppard, P. 1996. Traces of an Omnivore. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Shiva, V., and J. Bandyopadhyay. 1986. The evolution, structure, and impact of the Chipko Movement.

Mountain Research and Development 6:2, 133-142.Skolimowski, H. Undated. Forests as Sanctuaries. Eco-philosophy Publication no. 4. Ann Arbor: Eco-

Philosophy Center.Sochaczewski, P. 1998. Life reserves. ArborVitae (IUCN/WWF), April, 14.Sponsel, L.E., and P. Natadecha-Sponsel. 1993. The potential contribution of Buddhism in developing an

environmental ethic for the conservation of biodiversity. In Ethics, Religion, and Biodiversity. L.S.Hamilton, ed. Cambridge, U.K.: White Horse Press, 75-97.

Stevens, S. 1993. Claiming the High Ground: Sherpas, Subsistence, and Environmental Change in theHighest Himalaya. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Taylor, J.L. 1991. Living on the rim: ecology and forest monks in Northeast Thailand. Sojourn 6:1, 106-123.

Thoreau, H.D. 1893 [1947]. Walking. In Excursions: The Writings of Henry David Thoreau. (RiversideEdition, Boston.) As extracted in The Portable Thoreau. C. Bole, ed. New York: Viking.

Wachtel, P.S. 1993. Asia’s sacred groves. International Wildlife 43:2, 24-27.Wexler, M. 1998. Money does grow on trees—and so does better health and happiness. National Wildlife

36:3, 70.Wild Earth. Undated. The Wildlands Project. Wild Earth (Special Issue).Wilson, E.O. 1984. Biophilia. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Lawrence S. Hamilton, Vice-Chair (Mountains), IUCN World Commission onProtected Areas, 342 Bittersweet Lane, Charlotte, Vermont 05445; [email protected]

F

Forest & Tree Conservation