The draft National Forest Policy is by and large well-conceptualised. It seeks to modernise management practices while keeping in mind challenges posed by climate change
After several years of deliberations and counters, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change has finally decided to draft a fresh legislation to replace the colonial Indian Forest Act, 1927. In doing so, it seeks to reflect the changed needs and aspirations of the country while negotiating the challenges of forest and environment conservation, original dwellers and development imperatives.
Truth be told, the colonial law has little relevance considering the British framed it with the express purpose of harnessing natural resources for the Empire’s needs. The imperial rulers realised the potential of scientific forestry management practices that could help the colonial administration in procuring timber for revenue, developing the track infrastructure of the Indian Railways and other needs. The British Raj, therefore, established the Imperial Forest Department under Dietrich Brandis, a trained forester, in 1864.
Brandis held a vision of conserving forest catchments so that they could help in soil and moisture conservation that in turn helped agricultural practices. In 1884, he laid down a policy subordinating forestry to agriculture with the intention of protecting farm communities from repeated famines which would have a cascading social and economic cost. The first forest act was thus drafted in 1878 and with the formal opening of a dedicated college at Dehradun, forestry, as a full-fledged science, started taking roots in India. To mirror the changes of an evolved understanding and assessment, a new Forest Act was enacted in 1927, which is the law-enforcing book on forests in India today (many States framed their own laws exactly on the pattern of this Act) until the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, came into force.
In the early 1990s, the Central Government felt the need for a new law, considering there was a need for a joint forest management policy in the face of increasing plundering of forests by the timber mafia. Existing and codified punitive measures were archaic and clearly not sufficient. This writer was a member of two committees that were entrusted with the task of revising the Act, but after preparing a voluminous draft, it was found to be too unwieldy for implementation. Ultimately, it was decided to propose an increase in fine and compensation as also the duration of imprisonment for those committing offences by amending certain provisions in the Act.
Dimensions for forest conservation have changed in the past 15 years, primarily due to a shift in the focus from timber-oriented forestry to people-centric forest management practices. A fresh approach was required following the enactment of the Forest Rights Act, 2006, which had to factor in emerging challenges like encroachers, illegal poachers and mafia beside shrinkage, degradation and change of the forest cover itself due to climate change. Now let us discuss some of the silent features of the new draft Act. It must be accepted that the colonial Forest Act was the most people-friendly from among imperial edicts. It had a provision under Section 28 to create village forests, which is akin to the present-day joint forest management and the community forestry concept. Further, under Section 80, the Government can jointly manage any forest or wasteland with anybody’s support.
The old Act laid emphasis on the consolidation of forests and at the same time had left the door open for people’s involvement in deciding the extent of the Government forest land and the willingness to jointly manage any forest with anyone who is willing to do so. The new Act improves on this by expanding the chapter on village forests and giving them legal backing. This indeed is very crucial in the present-day scenario. The draft policy document also talks about degraded land and how it can be improved by undertaking afforestation activities using public-private partnership models.
The new draft Act aims to ensure smooth sailing for those people, who are dependent on the forests for their livelihood as also for capacity-building. Section 2 clearly defines forest land and produce, community, owner, local body, non-timber forest produce and shifting cultivation. This will help people exempt themselves from the transit regulatory regime for peddling their defined forest and horticulture produce. Section 4 will help in quick settlement of rights on forests by a designated officer. The new Act makes it explicitly clear under Section 5 that except under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, no pattas can be given to anyone. It also acknowledges the harmony between forest management and tribal life and makes provisions for adequate compensation for tribal land.
In the draft Act, the role of Gram Sabhas has been codified and it seeks to make provisions for other stakeholders, too, like people cooperatives/bodies, tribals and other Ministry officials, who will now be holistically included in forest management. One of the important features in the new Act is under Section 22(A) that recognises a procedure for recording individual and community rights — a very progressive and laudable venture.
The new Act seeks to deal firmly with emerging challenges, be it of timber mafia, poachers or any other anti-social elements. It rightfully empowers the forest officials and other law enforcing representatives to deal with such errants. According to global reports, India tops the list in losing forest officials to forest crime syndicates. The new draft provisions must, therefore, be complemented by enhancing infrastructure for the forest personnel, at par with the police.
However, in India, corruption is a big problem, even among forest staff, and self-proclaimed tribal well-wishers emerge with assistance from vested interests to derail any reform. Some of them have already started a campaign to criticise the provisions in the new draft Act that empower field forest officers. By raking up the issue of forest bureaucracy, they want to confuse our policy-makers. Stringent provisions are needed to deal with organised criminal activities, along with a people-centric approach in governance. India cannot meet climate change and other international commitments to sustainable goals and aim to enhance tree cover without a viable and strong legal back up. As it is, India is a water-stressed country. Unless forests in the catchments and elsewhere are saved, the situation will worsen. According to statistics by the Central Ground Water Board, 70 per cent of India’s districts suffer from shortage of ground water. The situation is turning acute year after year. Many rivers and their tributaries are drying up and many Indian villages and cities are facing shortage of drinking water. Water riots have broken out in many places.
It would be anybody’s guess as to what will happen to our agriculture in the next few years if steps are not taken to recharge the aquifers, protect our forests, manage our rural landscape and tackle climate change on a war-footing. Social media as well as intellectuals must realise that the good work of a large number of unsung foresters in nation-building should be recognised. In fact, it should be expanded with the provisions of the new Act to cater to the livelihood of the villagers situated in fringe forests.
Further, State Governments must come up with positive suggestions on the draft Act early without getting influenced by naysayers. Simultaneously the Environment Ministry should wrap up deliberatons on it in a timely manner. This is the best they can do to accommodate aspirations of forest-dependent people and save our green cover.
(The writer is a retired civil servant)