October 8, 2009: After east, the nature takes a wrath in southern districts with continued ranfaill for last few days casing major damanges in infrastructures.
Torrent rainfall on October 6 cut off Dagana from any contact with other parts of the country for the third time this year. The landslides caused by the rain blocked the 87 km Sunkosh-Dagana road at four places.
Due to the rainfall Baligangchu, 53 km from Sunkosh towards Dagana, has swollen up making it impossible for vehicles to ply the bypass. The other bypass to connect the district, Balingchu bridge, was washed away in August.
A major landslide occurred in Dagachu where falling boulders pose a great risk for travellers. In Ambichu, minor landslides occurred while Nidukha also experienced heavy landslides.
The continued rainfall has threatened to wash away Dagachu brigde as well. The health minister Zangley Dukpa, who is in Dagana visit, has been stranded in Dagapela due to landslide.
Road clearing work has begun but continued rainfall and landslide have posed difficulty in clearing the road.
The rain has also disrupted the power transmission towers in Dagana.
Vehicles plying between Trongsa and Gelephu have been stranded at Reutala in Zhemgang, due to the landslide.
The rainfall brought Druk air flights to a complete halt beside blocking national highways. Drukair today cancelled outgoing flights from Kolkata, Bangkok and Bagdogra.
In Chukha paddy cultivation in some areas is in danger of being washed away.
The meteorolists forecast rainfall at least another 36 hours as the wind is moving eartern parts.
The rainfall, which started around 7 pm on Tuesday evening, has affected all the distircts with the heavy showers in southern Bhutan.
The rainfall recorded in the last 30 hours so far, from 9 am Tuesday till 3 pm Wednesday, shows 166.8 mm in Sipsu in the south, 51.77 mm in Thimphu, 64.5 mm in Wangduephodrang and 59.22 mm in Zhemgang. Mongar and Trashigang received 28 mm and 27.8 mm of rain Tuesday 3 pm.
Major rivers have swollen. Thimpuchu gre from 1.80 m on Monday to 2.20 m by Tuesday 5 pm. Similarly, Amochu in Dorokha swelled from 3.00 m to 4.40 m, Punatsangchu from 1.75 m to 2.70 m, Sunkosh from 1.70 m to 3.90 m, Mangdechu from 6 m to 7.55 m, Kurichu from 7.10 m to 8.05 m and Aietchu in Gelephu from 1.60 m to 3.30 m.
Temporary landslide blockades on the Phuentsholing-Thimphu, Trongsa-Gelephu and Bumthang-Mongar highways were cleared.
Good coverage. We’ve our identity and are struggling to retain it. Likewise, RGOB wanted to rebaptise our nomenclature which is their revolution and process of pseudo Bhutanization. Take the example of ‘Bhaligangchu’. It is BhaleKhola (भालेखोला).
Name of places, our Dhungedhara, Chautaris, monuments etc are our cultural artefacts that needs preservation. We understand that due to economical and political factors, major and extravagent monuments were not built but whatever we have needs actual protection for unwanted threats.
Changing a name of a place is a crime as per UNESCO guidelines and a play on the heritage is significantly criticism. Good and expertise forum needs to discuss these pertinent issues and know the concern door.
Especially we the media groups need to be aware of these sensitive as well as burning issues.
THE INTERDEPENDENCY OF THE TANGIBLE AND INTANGIBLE
CULTURAL HERITAGE
Introduction
Over the past thirty years, the concept of cultural
heritage has been continually broadened. The Venice
Charter (1964) made reference to “monuments and sites”
and dealt with architectural heritage. The question
rapidly expanded to cover groups of buildings,
vernacular architecture, and industrial and 20th century
built heritage. Over and above the study of historic
gardens, the concept of “cultural landscape” highlighted
the interpenetration of culture and nature.
Today an anthropological approach to heritage leads us
to consider it as a social ensemble of many different,
complex and interdependent manifestations. This is now
reflecting the diversity of cultural manifestations.
The quest for the “message” of cultural properties has
become more important. It requires us to identify the
ethical values, social customs, beliefs or myths of which
intangible heritage is the sign and expression. The
significance of architectural or urban constructions and
the transformation of natural landscapes through human
intervention are more and more connected to questions
of identity.
It is out of these reflections that a more comprehensive
approach was developed during the past decade to give a
better appreciation of the intangible heritage as a source
of cultural identity, creativity and diversity. Intangible
heritage includes customs and oral traditions, music,
languages, poetry, dance, festivities, religious
ceremonies as well as systems of healing, traditional
knowledge systems and skills connected with the
material aspects of culture, such as tools and the habitat.
I. UNESCO’s activities for tangible heritage and
intangible heritage
For three decades, UNESCO’s normative
standard-setting activities focused on the
protection of tangible heritage by creating: the
Convention for the Protection of Cultural
Heritage in the Event of Armed Conflict (1954),
the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and
Preventing the Illicit Export, Import and Transfer
of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970), the
Convention concerning the Protection of the
World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972), and
the Convention on the Protection of the
Underwater Cultural Heritage (2001).
II. UNESCO’s action on intangible heritage
As a consequence, the safeguarding of intangible
heritage remained for a long time rather neglected,
although a first step in this direction was made in
1973, when the Permanent Delegation of Bolivia
proposed that a Protocol be added to the
Universal Copyright Convention in order to
protect folklore. This proposal was not successful
but it helped to raise awareness of the need to
recognize and include intangible aspects within the
area of cultural heritage.
However, it was only in 1982 that UNESCO set up
a “Committee of Experts on the Safeguarding of
Folklore” and created a special “Section for the
Non-Tangible Heritage”, resulting in the
Recommendation on the Protection of Traditional
Culture and Folklore, adopted in 1989. This
Recommendation set an important precedent for
recognizing “traditional culture and folklore”. It
also encouraged international collaboration, and
considered measures to be taken for its
identification, preservation, dissemination and
protection.
Since 1989, several regional assessments on the
impact of this Recommendation have been made.
They culminated in the Washington International
Conference in June 1999 organized jointly by
UNESCO and the Smithsonian Institution. Experts
taking part in this conference concluded that a new
or revised legal instrument would be required to
address questions of terminology and the breadth
of the subject matter more adequately. The
Conference underlined the need to place emphasis
on tradition-bearers rather than scholars. It also
highlighted the need to be more inclusive,
encompassing not only artistic products such as
tales, songs and so forth, but also knowledge and
values enabling their production, the creative
processes that bring the products into existence and
the modes of interaction by which these products are
received and acknowledged.
The increasing importance of intangible cultural
heritage within UNESCO is also highlighted by
two programmes: the Living Human Treasures
system (launched in 1993) and the Proclamation of
Masterpieces of Oral and Intangible Heritage of
Humanity (launched in 1998).