SUNDAY, JUNE 30, 2024
The Central government introduced the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023 in the Lok Sabha on March 29 this year. Generally speaking, the Bill exempts certain types of forest land from the protection afforded by the Act.
It also expands the list of activities that can be carried out on forest land. Both these aspects have drawn an outcry from conservationists and environmentalists, who are saying that the amendment opens the doors for commercial exploitation of lands that were hitherto protected under this Act.
The government has also not inspired much confidence regarding its intentions by sending the Bill to a Select committee of Parliament instead of referring it to the Standing committee on science, technology, environment, and forest for scrutiny.
With the Parliamentary committee now accepting submissions on the Bill, there is renewed debate on its provisions and what they mean for India’s forests. The forest is not just about wildlife, it is also about habitants who who've been traditionally living there for a very long time.
Also any destruction of forests has direct bearing on changes in rainfall pattern and on the water flowing from the numerous streams that originate from these forests. Depleting forest cover would lead to the drying up of not just forests, but also the freshwater sources, which ultimately have a drastic effect on our lives, which is already happening.
In these circumstances, the question that needs to be asked is, will this Bill safeguard Goa’s forests or will it dilute the protections given under the FCA?
Sharing his thoughts, Abhijit Prabhudesai, member, Federation of Rainbow Warriors, said, “We have to look at the history of forests in Goa. You know the Britishers brought the Indian Forest Act 1927, which basically looked at forests like a source of revenue and completely disregarded the actual ecological services and the inhabitants. It was a complete disaster.”
In 1980, the Forest (Conservation) Act was enacted. This had a vision of actually understanding the forest as being something that provides ecological services, provides life to everybody and is so critical and essential to be conserved. So, this Act has been in force for over 40 years.
In 1996, a landmark judgment was passed by the Supreme Court, which actually defined a forest. The Supreme Court said in very simple words that a forest is something, which you go by the dictionary meaning of the word Forest. So, if it looks like a forest, it's a forest, in very simple terms. So, that brought in all the forest lands, which were not protected till that moment, and therefore all State governments were actually asked to identify the forests which are not protected.
“But that has not happened in these 25 odd years and the Goa government also has consistently managed to keep forests out of protection in Goa. We are left with a situation where half of our forests are not protected. So, now because of the Supreme Court order, still some sanity has remained and forests are not really being attacked,” Prabhudesai said.
“This is the background where there's this massive conflict, where there's a law which says you have to conserve forests. But there are a number of lobbies like mining, real estate and the industrial lobby, which are looking at diverting and fragmenting forests for generating profits,” the activist said.
“In this backdrop, the government came out with this Amendment Bill. It was published on May 3 and people were given only 15 days to file objections, which is completely unbelievable, because any amendment to the Forest Act would immediately impact everybody who lives in the forest and otherwise. It was essential to discuss the proposed amendments at the ground level, should have gone through Forest Department officers and everybody involved in forests,” he said.
“There was no stakeholder consultation. Even when the CRZ laws were amended in 2011, there were tremendous consultations across the country with the ordinary people and that's what gave us a good law. Here you see a very clear intent to hide what they are doing. That's why they gave only 15 days, hoping that nobody would object. But fortunately, people across the board have sent in objections,” Prabhudesai said.
“Why they are trying to conceal becomes very clear when you read the contents of the Amendments, which are completely against the objectives of the Forest Act. Every amendment is to dilute or to remove protection of forests,” the activist said.
When asked about his opinion on the amendments, Milind Karkhanis, former Deputy Conservator of Forests, said that in India, out of the total geographical area, 21.71 percent is forest area, whereas we should have at least 33 percent.
“It appears that this was the situation right when the country was at the threshold of Independence. 75 years have passed. We could have easily increased it to 35 percent if we had the will. It still can be done because there are a lot of things which are in the government’s control to increase the forest area. If that is increased, if the basic ecological wealth of this country is kept intact, then all these things can be really done,” Karkhanis said.
He said that there has been no attempt to increase the basic canvas of the forest areas at all.
“The forest faces a problem from two quarters - one is from the actual offender who destroys the forest and the other is the authorities who allow destruction. Protecting forest means bringing that particular Forest within the ambit of a particular law, which has stringent provisions. Nobody can play with that and if somebody does, he becomes a violator and can be tried and punished under the law,” he said.
“So, bringing those forests under the ambit of those particular laws is the requirement that was done earlier in 1927. Then it was done in 1972 and hence we could have the reserve forests and the protected areas like wildlife sanctuaries, national parks etc. Even with that, officers were playing mischief with the forest land. The introduction of the FCA in 1980 stopped them from doing that,” he said.
According to Karkhanis, this enactment had certain effects, though not much.
“The problem in this new Forest Conservation Amendment Act is there is no provision to take stringent action against the violators. Protection of forests basically is supposed to be conservation of the forests. One has to take care of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends to happen otherwise. So this important aspect of conservation is missing from the ambit of this proposed law.
The lives of forest communities are being ravaged everywhere. How are their lives affected and how will these amendments further cause problems for them?
Ravindra Velip, Vice President, GAKUVED said that the preamble of the forest conservation talks about conservation. The Indian Forest Act, Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 and this Forest Conservation Act 1980 - all these came into force post Goa’s liberation, that is after 1961.
“But the question arises over protecting the forests prior to that. The tribal communities, who are settled in the lap of the forest, treat nature as their god. So whatever we are getting from nature, we use it for our livelihood and we are duty-bound towards protecting nature. The government is bringing amendments to further dilute the Forest Conservation Act not for protection but destruction of the forest,” Velip said.
If one visits Google Earth site and compares the forest cover in Goa before 2006 and now, one shall see rampant destruction of the forest in last 20 years, despite having Forest Conservation Act 1980 in force. This is happening because the concerns of the forest community are not taken into consideration, he said.
“A fresh mining lease was proposed in our village without consulting the people. Even the forest Department gave consent to this proposal. The forest community objected and now have filed a petition in the High Court. This is an example of how the community plays a major role in conserving the forest. When these amendments come into play, these communities will become much more vulnerable because their rights won’t be protected any longer,” he said.
Prabhudesai said, “If you if you look at the Forest Conservation Amendment Bill 2023, basically what they are doing is the very first section defines the Act. They have brought in Section 1a (1), which actually defines forest. The forest has already been defined by the Supreme Court as any land which has got forest on it. Therefore, it is protected under the Forest Conservation Act.
“Now what they are saying under Section 1a (1), that only the lands which are declared or notified as forests under the Indian Forest Act 1927 or the Forest Conservation Act 1980, only those will be protected. Lands registered in government records subsequent to 1980, only those which are on record as forests will be protected,” he said.
“Now this may seem innocuous on the face of it. But if you just go to the Forest Survey of India's report of 2021, which is the latest one, it says in the whole of India there are 7,13,789 square kilometres of forest. Out of this 1,97,000 square kilometres of land lie outside the recorded forest area. So if you see the Forest Survey of India's report, they are classifying forests based on the ones which are within recorded forest area. That means, area which is within the Wildlife Protection Act or under any of these Acts recorded as forests,” Prabhudesai said.
“They are also looking at forests which are outside the protected area. You can see two lakh square meters, which is about 28 percent of forest area, will be lost. It will be free for anybody to cut the forest and use the land for real estate construction activity. So this is completely outrageous. This is something that is unbelievable and what it will lead to is for anybody to guess. You are going to see complete devastation,” he said.
Velip said that for a small State like Goa, losing 28 percent of forest land is a huge thing. It constitutes the ecology of Goa. If you go to Sanguem and Quepem areas, all the forest said that the forest is on hills, form the reservoir for the Salaulim dam. That water is supplied to South Goa.
“If this protection is removed for the sake of development, it would be disastrous,” he said.
According to Prabhudesai, although the figure of unprotected area is 28 percent for the whole of India, it is much more in case of Goa.
“The Forest Survey of India report states that 1220 square kilometre area is protected in Goa, while 1024 sq km land, which is almost half of the forests, are outside the recorded forest area. The local communities are fighting for protecting the forests which are not recorded. There you have bison, leopards and even tigers. But it's not recorded as a forest,” he said.
“This is a direct assault on the forests which are not recorded. Now if you see, there's another section which is added section 1a (2). It states that even if you have a forest, in certain cases it will not be considered as a forest. So actually, this is very strange. If you are saying it's a forest, how can you exclude it from the Forest Conservation Act? It's quite a contradiction. If you have a public road, then forest may no longer be considered as there is less than 1000 square meters then. If you need it as an access to some other land you want to develop, you will be allowed to disregard the forest,” Prabhudesai said.
“Similarly, if there is forest land within 100 km from the international border with Nepal or China, the forest in 100 km distance will lose protection. Then, any forest in less than five hectares and proposed to be used for defence related projects like paramilitary camps or public utility projects, will also be disregarded. Also, in the Left-wing extremism affected areas as it's called, if there are any such projects, those also would not be considered,” he said.
Now, the bill proposes to add zoos, wildlife safaris, ecotourism and all these operations into the exempted rule. Now there's one very interesting line which says, “Any other purpose which the central government may by order specify”. Now this line has been infused or inserted to qualify exemptions or to essentially expand the scope of exceptions. What does “any other purpose” mean?
“If you see the original Forest Conservation Act section 2 (1), the explanation to it excluded certain specific activities from the need to take permissions under the Forest Conservation Act. These activities, if you see the list in the original Act, are purely related to the activities of the Forest Department itself. So whether it's silviculture, which is regeneration of forests, whether you are building check posts, wireless communication or fencing boundaries, bridges or culverts - these are all excluded. But now with this amendment, they propose to expand it. The central government could allow anything from mining to building dams,” Prabhudesai said.
Attention needs to be drawn to one aspect, which is of extreme importance to Goa. Also it states that forest lands along railway lines and public roads will not be protected as a forest anymore. This means that all forest lands which come on alongside railway tracks, will no longer be under protection.
So the way it has been drafted, it says such forest land situated alongside a rail line or a public road maintained by the government, which provides access to a habitation or to a rail and roadside amenity up to a maximum size of 0.1 hectare in each case.
If there's for example a road or a highway and if there are forests on the side, up to 1000 square meters of forest land will be allowed to be diverted. The forest would not be protected. But they are talking of future railway lines. So is there any existing railway, if there's any existing road and if you want to build a road through the forest on the side, you will be allowed.
So the thing is, it's not just about existing railway lines and public roads. For instance, let's look at double tracking in forest areas. Then that will become valid.
“So, this is exactly the opposite of what is required. These are linear projects. These linear projects are much more harmful to the forest because you are fragmenting. You are having a big highway of 40 meters. You're going to lose your entire wildlife. It's not going to exist anymore now. It's such a big disaster for the forest,” Prabhudesai said.
“Right now, if you're going to allow more of the forest to be diverted, it's going to completely destroy all the wildlife and if you're going to allow other economic activities like construction of roads, then the land gets opened up for real estate activities. Basically, this will allow buildings to start coming up all around these areas. The forest cannot be taken as an ‘enemy of development’,” he said.
People perhaps are not realising that the destruction of the forest will ultimately lead to the destruction of the very development that you are proposing. Because, in the sense that without your forest, without your streams, without your water resources, you cannot build an artificial ecosystem and carry on building bridges and dams.
That is something which people are not realising, because the impact of the forest is not just going to be on your trees and your green cover, it's going to affect your entire ecosystem, your climate, your water table, food etc.
