Van (Sanrakashan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam: Tool for destruction

The proposed changes dilute the definition of forests, ignore the importance of mangroves, and accelerate deforestation

The Forest Rights Act of 2006 has been the biggest tool for the destruction of forests, and the proposed amendment bill will be the second biggest tool for destruction. The Forest (Conservation) Act (FCA) is being renamed "Van (Sanrakashan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam". Along with the diversion of the forest land, it proposes to deal with development as well. The safeguards for diversion are being lowered, while activities like private leases for development are being promoted. Experts and conservationists across the country have criticised the move. A Joint Parliamentary Committee is examining the bill. Nearly 80 per cent of public representations to the committee are said to be against the bill.

The importance of forests in achieving the goal of net zero emissions by 2070, fulfilling the nationally determined contribution of additional carbon storage of 2.5 to 3 gigatons of CO2, increasing tree cover to occupy one third of the country, preserving biodiversity, enhancing social, economic, and environmental benefits, and ensuring management of forests to restore the ecological security of the country are the goals emphasised in the bill. But on the contrary, the bill dilutes the definition of forests, excludes areas from the applicability of FCA, and overlooks the importance of mangroves, which are essential to mitigate the impact of sea surges. The bill does not take us towards the goal; it takes us in a negative direction to accelerate deforestation.

Also Read | Karnataka: 3000 acres forest diverted to set up tree parks

Attempts are made to dilute the definition of ‘forests’ and exclude several wooded areas from the purview of FCA's applicability. On December 12, 1996, the Supreme Court of India ruled that the dictionary meaning of "forests would have to be taken into account while applying the provisions of this Act." States were asked to list out all deemed forests and apply FCA in every case of diversion. More than two decades ago, deemed forest lists were finalised by states under an affidavit to the Supreme Court. Later, some states, like Karnataka, filed a fresh affidavit and reduced the area under deemed forests from the 10 lakh hectares originally identified to 3 lakh hectares. Attempts made to exclude areas from the purview of FCA's applicability are bound to degrade and fragment forests.

The bill indicates that the areas to be notified as forests in the future will not attract the amended law for diversion cases. The compensatory lands in lieu of forest areas already diverted and that are not notified forests so far stand excluded from applicability. Consequent to the abolition of the zamindari system, vast stretches of wooded areas in several states were to be notified as forests but have remained pending because of the red tape in the bureaucracy. The importance of mangroves in the coastal belt in checking cyclones and sea surges is known, and many states are in the process of notifying them as "reserved forests." All such areas are excluded from the scope of applicability. I agree with the critics that this move would lead to massive diversion of forest lands and consequent deforestation.

Construction of strategic linear projects for the nation’s security within 100 km of the international border, other defence-related projects, locating camps for paramilitary forces, public utility projects, and camps for security forces in left-wing extremist areas on forest land are also proposed to be exempted. Critics are against all such exemptions. A hundred kilometres from the international border will cover almost the entire Himalaya and Northeast. The ecological services, climate mitigation measures, spread of zoonotic diseases, and livelihood for rural folk are the reasons why critics oppose it.

I also agree with the critics except for strategic linear infrastructure projects like roads, bridges, underpasses, tunnels, and railway lines within 100 km of the international border for the security of the nation. It should remain on the exemption list of the amended FCA. Looking at the massive infrastructure development on the Chinese side of the border, we must speed up similar development on our side. Critics are unjustified in presuming that all forests within 100 km of the international border will be sacrificed and the catchment of rivers will be lost. The diversion of a few linear strips of forests for national security may have an insignificant impact on climate. At present, out of the 50 gigatons of CO2 equivalent emitted by all nations annually, 14 gigatons are emitted by China, 8 gigatons by the US, and India is a distant third, emitting 3 gigatons annually. We know that emissions in any part of the world will impact lives everywhere, but we cannot afford to delay the development of such strategic projects. However, there should be no exemption for the diversion of forest lands for camps of paramilitary and security forces in left-wing extremist areas as well as public utility projects.

The exemptions provided for silvicultural operations, tracing fire lines, construction of boundary pillars, rejuvenation of water holes, maintenance of forest roads and bridges, and establishing checkpoints and infrastructure for frontline staff are unnecessary. These operations are governed by working plans and forest codes and are implemented routinely. Repeating it in the FCA amendment bill is meaningless, and it has given scope for criticism. Maybe these operations are added here to justify the inclusion of the word ‘Samvardhan’, which is again uncalled for. From the phrase ‘silvicultural operations’ critics are assuming that natural forests are intended to be replaced by monoculture. This is untrue. Focusing on forest protection and preventing fire and encroachments is another duplication.

Rights are claimed on encroached forest lands under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006. The cutoff date for occupation by tribal people is December 13, 2005, while for other traditional forest dwellers it is December 13, 1930. On the invitation of the Telangana government, one and a half lakh families have occupied 1.62 lakh hectares of forest lands recently and claimed rights. Though the Central Empowered Committee of the Supreme Court has directed the Chief Secretary to obtain clearance under FCA, the district-level committees, relying on concocted evidence, are justifying it under FRA. Diluting FCA makes the Forest Department toothless and accelerates deforestation.

(The writer is a retired principal chief conservator of forests, Karnataka.)