Thoughts on the Biocultural Diversity at Niah Caves

This literature is a replicate of the author’s Field Journal during their trip to Niah Caves, Sarawak in 2019.

Prior to the trip, I have assumed a number of things incorrectly based on merely what few information I had access to at that time. For instance, I have thought that the Iban community had long (i.e. thousands of years) been part of the area, merely due to the presence of Iban longhouse nearby the caves. My background research on the Niah Caves was also lacking in depth and therefore I had poor understanding on the Niah Caves system and its surrounding area.

My view was narrowed to merely the historical context of the Niah Caves (e.g. Deep Skull) instead of the contemporary aspect of the interaction between the local natives and the caves, which may also demonstrate a form of Biocultural Diversity (BCD) of the Niah Caves in the present time. Although still lacking in (academic) depth, I at least have a better understanding of the BCD of the area and a clearer picture of the context than before the study trip. Previously, I have asked the following questions in my Background Notes*:-

*A background research (i.e. online search) conducted prior to the trip.

1. Who are the people and cultures still traditionally engaged with the Niah Caves (besides Iban and Punan, if any) and the areas surrounding the site?
2. How their cultural practices relate/contribute to Biodiversity (are they sustainable practices?)
3. Richness of their language? Personal stories from indigenous groups regarding languages/knowledge lost, if any.
4. Traditional Ecological Knowledge and in what language(s), if any.

Although I may still consider some of the questions above where relevant, my current focus is on the interaction of the native locals with the Niah National Park + nearby environments (particularly the Niah Caves) and its plausible connection to BCD.

OVERVIEW:

1. BRIEF BACKGROUND
2. THE IBAN LONGHOUSE EXPERIENCE
3. ADDRESSING THE QUESTIONS FROM BACKGROUND NOTES
4. THE IBAN COMMUNITY AND THE NIAH CAVES
5. MISCELLANEOUS INFO/DISCUSSIONS

1. BRIEF BACKGROUND

In my Background Notes, I mentioned about the discovery of the oldest modern human remains (Deep Skull). According to a study in 2016 by Curnoe et al., the individual was most likely related to the contemporary indigenous people of Borneo, particularly from the mainland East Asia. Before the trip, I easily and naively assumed that the Iban community had lineages from the human remains mentioned. I have also mistaken the earlier foragers in the area (Penans) as Punans. However, I did also consider alternative theories regarding the human remains that it could be of other ancient tribes believed to have been ‘wiped out’ due to their not wanting to submit to the one Supreme Creator (Ref: Al-Qur’an Surah 29, Verses: 38 – 40 and others). In addition, one of the elderlies of the Iban longhouse did share about how the bone remains found were bigger and longer [in size] than the average human today (in Borneo). Since this is just the Brief Background section, the discussion above may be brought forward to the miscellaneous info/discussion section.

From a verbally-shared information derived from one of the foster families, the Iban group is actually quite a recent community in this area than previously thought. I was told that several Iban firstcomers arrived here in the 1930s. I was also told by another elderly that their ancestors initially struggled to reside in the area and eventually succeeded after they were granted permission by the Penans to settle in the area and began to build the longhouse in 1945 (figures differ from different sources). This event indicates that the Penans were the earlier inhabitants and had been in the area longer, until most, if not all, embraced Islam and eventually settled in the more ‘Malay’ kampongs elsewhere. The Iban group mostly stayed until today. Although the Penans were earlier in the area (and stayed at the caves!), they are unnecessarily the descendants from the old modern human remains, as Curnoe et al. (2016) also suggests that the specimen are also similar to that of ‘Philippine Negritos‘ population. Even Penans could be the ‘newcomers’ due to their nomadic nature as hunter-gatherers.

2. THE IBAN LONGHOUSE EXPERIENCE

The local who was driving us to their longhouse shared a few information when asked about how the native people engage with the Niah National Park and if there are Native Customary Land Rights involved. Although some of them work away from Miri, such as in Bintulu, and only return once in a while; many of them still serve as the ‘cultural’ aspect of the tourism in the area. He also told us that they cultivate mostly tree fruits, especially the palm fruits (for the palm oil) as well as Barley field. My ‘foster parents’ told that their main income is from selling the palm fruits to the nearby factory. Prior to the palm oil demand from the food industry among others, they also had paddy farm about at least 20 years ago as well as chilli crops which stopped to flourish in the area about 3 years ago. In regards to the Native Customary Land Rights, we were told that their territory is indicated by the river. Therefore, anything beyond the river belongs to Niah National Park/government.

Before the longhouse homestay had electricity directly supplied to them, they used a generator. They also used to move from place to place via the river before the construction of the gravel road. The longhouse was considered as ‘recently’ refurnished with newer wood planks derived from a strong type of tree bark (if unmistaken, the tour guide must have referred to the ‘Belian Trees’ which are difficult to get lately due to its slow growth and great usage in the past). A bit of context/info – at the homestay we were divided into groups and each is assigned to a foster family for a day. Meals were served at the common area (the corridor) and were potlucks from every family who waited all of the guests to take the food before they could start taking the food as well. Upon hearing they speak, it seems their language has many similar terms (or at least similar sounding) to the Malay language. Hence, we could understand some conversations without the need of translation. Besides the Iban, there were stories of Indonesian and a Bugis couple staying at the longhouse to help at the palm tree plantation and other businesses run by the locals.

3. ADDRESSING THE QUESTIONS FROM BACKGROUND NOTES

For question 1:

As far as I know, the birds’ nests in the caves are [claimed as] privately owned by different individuals with different cultures, which possibly includes Malay culture. According to the map of Sarawak in 1927, Niah was still part of Brunei Darussalam which makes it no surprise when a local Iban told us that one of the swiftlets’ nests in the Niah Caves belongs to a former Bruneian who now have changed his citizenship to Malaysia and lives at “kampong Melayu” (referring to the person has adapted to the Malay lifestyle). Therefore, collection of bird nests from the caves still occur by people from different origins and cultures today. Besides that, they also use the guano as fertilisers and most of these fertilisers are sold. This makes me wonder if the declining growth of crops such as the chilli is due to deteriorating soil nutrients because they no longer replace enough guano fertilisers in their own soils as compared to decades ago, because of sales to other places. However, this is merely an assumption.

Question 2:

Back then, the Iban community celebrated Gawai festival as a form of celebrating their paddy harvest. Today, they still celebrate the festival but this cultural celebration no longer has the original link to its environment since the thwart in their rice cultivation and transition to mainly palm oil. Thus, probably only the cultural aspect remains intact. Seeing that the rice paddy and chilli crops are no longer feasible on these soils, it is not certain to conclude whether their practices back then were sustainable enough, or it is due to modern interruption of the pressures of economic demands to certain types of crops and/or the declining soil nutrients discussed in Question 1’s answer.

I did not manage to ask question 3 since my focus had shifted to a different aspect. In addition, this question is actually too vague at this point.

Question 4:

Another vague question, but from the information acquired, there are 2 categories of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) I would like to point out from this study trip.

1. Those of the Penans:-
   • Especially the older generations who stayed at the caves; built homes, etc.
   • The leftover wooden frames of their homes remain intact after hundreds of years, indicating their knowledge of biospecies of tree barks with outstanding strength and durability.
   • Their skills in woodwork are impressive; they did not need nails to screw the wooden frames in place; as can be observed, their woodwork and carpentry skills show strong architectural knowledge as their structures were strongly held in place nonetheless (like the concept of legos).
     
2. Those of the Ibans:-
   • The wooden planks used for their longhouse are derived from similar durable tree species, showing ecological knowledge.
   • The concern for lost TEK – there may be TEK of paddy cultivation which is specific to the Iban culture not passed down since it halted about 20 years ago.

4. THE IBAN COMMUNITY AND THE NIAH CAVES
(+ NEARBY ENVIRONMENTS)

Today, the people from the longhouse still sell food, drinks and souvenir items that they made themselves at the junction which leads to either the Niah National Park Headquarters or towards the Traders’ Cave entrance. The activity (of selling) was pioneered by their late grandparents and before them; as a source of income. In addition, they also earn from maintaining the public toilets which were built by the Chinese [community], located just next to their vendor stalls. The bird nests and guano for fertilisers are also one of their multiple sources of income derived from the Niah Caves. Since the Niah Caves are open to both locals and international visitors, the longhouse residents took this opportunity to cater the visitors with the homestay experience inclusive of traditional meals among other activities. Even their recent refurnishing of the longhouse were privately-funded, and not by the government. They opt for the community-based tourism to generate income from their cultural experience/lifestyle.

The locals also shared that back then when they still mainly harvested rice, when there were people who disrupted with their farms, they (disruptors) would be penalised to pay certain items or animals to the Iban community. For instance, if it was disrupted by machineries, the penalised should pay with a boar in exchange of the damages they caused. When asked if the Iban tribe still hunt certain animals in the wild, an uncle said they no longer do that nowadays, especially now they have access to towns via the gravel roads. All in all, although developments have led to changes in their landscape (e.g. new roads, wooden plank walkways toward the Niah Caves provided for visitors, etc.) as well as change in their income generation/subsistence strategies (i.e. homestays, souvenirs and palm oil); they managed to conserve their cultural setting, practices and values, reflecting a strong cultural continuity.

5. MISCELLANEOUS INFO / DISCUSSIONS

• We were told that the Niah Caves today are way far ‘quieter’ than it was before, implying that there are now lesser population of swiftlets and bats residing in the caves.
• During the trip, sightings in the forests and caves include: colourful butterflies, big lizards, millipedes which I’ve never seen before (with sharp pointy part at its back), snails, limestone waterdrops/puddle, and various species of plants.
• Relating the Iban to BCD; since they are considered as ‘newcomers’ after the Penans, there must be strong enough reason for them to risk through asking the Penans for permission to reside in the area. This choice may depict their strong TEK to know that this place would benefit their generations to come.
• This corresponds with Axelsen and Manrubia’s (2014) determinants for linguistic diversity where river density and landscape roughness positively correlates with linguistic diversity. The area of Niah Caves does in fact, contain river channels and considerably rough landscape (by observation and feel) that it attracts not only the various species of animals (hence some plants species are brought here); but also the indigenous people such as the Penans and Iban groups to look for sustenance and settle here.
• To continue the miscellaneous discussions from the brief background section; In the Islamic faith, we also believe that there was a major flooding event which wiped out humans/people as well as other natural disasters which befell the previous people who were bigger and stronger than modern humans today. (Ref: In the Qur’an, Surah 30, Verse 9). [Allahua’lam Bissowab]
• I did check Google Earth to verify if there was really paddy farm back then, however the map resolution decades ago weren’t as clear as today to be certain of what was on the lands (but there was no gravel road).

Reference

Axelsen, J. B., & Manrubia, S. (2014). River density and landscape roughness are universal determinants of linguistic diversity. Proceedings. Biological Sciences / The Royal Society, 281(1784), 20133029. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.3029

Curnoe, D., Datan, I., Taçon, P. S. C., Leh Moi Ung, C., & Sauffi, M. S. (2016). Deep skull from Niah cave and the Pleistocene peopling of southeast Asia. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2016.00075