It seems to us that ecologists get the best gift of this millennium from M L Rosenzweig. The concept of reconciliation ecology of Rosenzweig is very promising.

In my study of the Loktak Lake in Manipur for nearly four years, I suggested that the main cause of the loss of biodiversity in the lake is the Ithai Barrage (a dam on the Manipur River) and this barrage should be dismantled and the project called the Loktak Hydro Electric Project should be decommissioned.

In fact, I was one of the severest critiques of the project and dam and involved in many campaigns against them. But after the coming of the concept of reconciliation ecology of ML Rosenz-weig, everything had been changed.

Rosenzweig proposed the concept of three R's. The first R is reservation ecology. It is about how to conserve and manage landscape in its pristine form. However, the question is 'will it be feasible'. I don't think so because human impact is always there and I believe, it will always be there. Changes in landscapes are inevitable. You can never plug in human activities.

The second R is restoration ecology - to restore damaged or degraded ecosystem. Again I suspect its feasibility. Some recent studies in Nevada, USA seems to indicate that it will be impractical. In that area Tamarix ramosisima (salt-cedar) has displaced native tree species, such as Salix trees.

Eradication of thousands of Tamarix trees to restore native trees actually had no benefits to the biota (including many native birds, such as many flycatcher species which were adapting to the Tamarix trees).

Instead, it resulted in the total mismanagement of the rich biodiversity. Then, now comes the third R- the Reconciliation ecology- reconciliation of restoration and reservation ecology.

It is partly restoration of degraded ecosystem and partly reservation or conservation of the ecosystem; it is in this sense that the degraded ecosystem is given some kind of conservational effort as well as some kind of disturbances in the form of mild human/anthropogenic activities.

This "Reconciliation Ecology" will turn out to be the best conservational approach in the coming years. Now coming to the main topic, I would like to see many dams and hydroelectric projects coming up in this power-starved state.

Frankly speaking, the Tipaimukh dam should be built or constructed at any cost, considering its large economic benefits to one of the poorest state in the north-east India. Recent threat to resort to bandhs and economic blockade by certain organizations working on the protection of environment (people against the Tipaimukh Dam) is unwarranted.

This is plain terrorism. Certain "green alarmists" are going to take up extreme steps and introduce new-age terrorism. They have blindly burrowed a "Western Euphoria" about a biological absurdity which includes species extinction and habitat destruction.

How many of us know about the American prairies? Almost all the grassland patches are being destroyed. In Britain, all the species of wolves and bears have reportedly become extinct.

The West is accusing people in the developing countries for all the environmental problems. But I believe that the only threat to biodiversity and environment is the existence of a consumptive society (the peculiar society of the West). We should not feel panicky at a few dams here and there.

What is more alarming is the change in our society or simply put, the westernization of our society - from a simple and nature–friendly society to a complex, industrial and consumptive one.

Here, I am not supporting the destruction of many natural habitats. We must conserve the pristine, natural habitats as far as possible. However, we must not forget the need for development; the protection of environment should not be allowed to become a hindrance to the human development in our state or in our country.

As a matter of fact, development and environment should be treated as two sides of the same coin. We must not allow the development of a kind of tussle or tug-of–war between environmentalist and development planner. A few changes in the ecology and environment are inevitable if there is some developmental works.

And we have many ecologists who can attend to such problems. Ecologists could provide solutions for the management of the ecology and environment, if not for the conservation of the environment. We need many developmental works to feed our hungry and poor people.

It will be quite relevant to mention one ancient Chinese proverb here, "When there is food on the table, there are many problems. But when there is no food on the table, there is only one problem". We have only one problem - that is, economic or human development.

Other problems are simply non-existent. So my appeal to the general public, particularly those activists who are very vociferous against dams and projects, is to do some justice to our valuable time.

We must not resort to extreme activities, instead if we are so much care for our ecology and environment, let us start living a simple life: no plastics, consume less, no unnecessary gadgets or accessories.

I suggest the following papers and books for further readings, if anyone is interested;

M.L. Rosenzweig (2003) Win-Win Ecology. Oxford. Fleishmann et al. (2003) J. of Animal Ecology. 72:484-490. Sher et al. (2000) Conservation Biology. 14:1744-1.