Now a controversy is going on for management of village forests under the provisions of Chapter III of Orissa Forest Act 1972 and Forest Right Act 2006.
There are several Acts and rules of the Centre and different States for management of forests. Sometimes our policy makers become politically blind and make such policies and laws which create hurdles for management of forest properties and enforcement of legal provisions for safety of the properties.
During British regime, the scientific management of forest resources first was taken up by Dr Brandis, who was a British forester and had been to India for scientific management of forest resources. He is also known as the father of India forestry.
The forests of India and Odisha are broadly classified as reserved forests, village forests and protected forests. The reserve forests are further classified as class A and B. Before enactment of Orissa Forest Act 1972, the forests of Odisha were governed under the provisions Indian Forest Act 1972 and Madras Forest Act 1882.
‘A’ class reserve forests is the exclusive property of the State. No public right is entertained over ‘A’ class reserve forests but the forest products are utilized for common interest. The State Government does all kind of forestry operations in respect of forest lands within its State boundary. Similarly ‘B’ class reserve forests are partially rights burdened and the tenants and the stakeholders of the ex-States and ex-estates were enjoying the rights of collection of house building materials, firewood, collection of minor forest produce, grazing of cattle, obtaining timbers for agricultural implements, bamboos for ‘domestic uses, etc. Such rights ceased to exist since the promulgation of the Forest Right Act 2006. In a ‘B’ class reserve forest, a few important timber species are prohibited for felling. Such trees are preserved for meeting certain eventualities, like fire accidents, flood, cyclone and war emergency etc. Further, the people residing in a forest block and outside are allowed to collect forest produce other than timber.
Tassar cocoons and lac are commercial products of forests. Many cottage industries depend heavily for their raw material need on the local forests.
Protected forests are the forests of the villagers, who enjoy rights over the forest resources. It is time the Government took a judicious decision on the rights of the common people over different kinds of forests keeping in view their livelihood problem and the need of the local industries. The much touted ‘Make In India’ programme many not succeed, if people are deprived of their legitimate rights over forest resources. Denial of the rights would mean violation of human rights and constitutional rights to life, liberty, equality and dignity.
It is a fact that the forest dwellers have great contributions for preservation, conservation and management of forest resources from time immemorial. Generally they do not involve in forest crimes. The writer served nearly four decades in the State Forest Department, but he never found any forest dwellers committing a commercial crime, except carrying out cultivation of forest land for their survival. They always acquire their minimum needs from forests for their survival. They do not care the poverty and do not compare themselves with the well- to- do people of the plains.
There are 62 tribes in India. They mostly live inside the forests. A negligible percentage of tribal families are noticed in protected forests because the protected forests are right burdened and they cannot get their minimum needs of livelihood form such forests. No tribal family is confined to any particular forest block for their day-to-day living and they move from one forest block to the other for their survival and livelihood. Special economic attention should be given by the both centre and State administrations for upliftment of the tribal forest dwellers and bringing them to the mainstream of life.
Chapter III of Orissa Forest Act 1972 and Chapter III of Indian Forest Act 1927 deal with village forests. Section 30 empowers the State Government to entrust responsibility on the villagers for preservation of forests. For the first time the provisions of State Forest Act 1972 was applied to human ravaged forest blocks of communal forests/protected forests of Talcher Sub Division during the seventies, which was quite successful. This was the time when social forestry was initiated and it was a remarkable success as village communities joined hands and took up the responsibility to save forests. Now the drive has taken a new name, called joint forest management.
There is no legal or ecological difference between social forestry, communal forestry or joint forest management. Now every forest block is a communal forest block, including the areas where the forest dwellers are present.
(The writer is a former senior forest officer and an environmentalist. Tel no 9937460649)