In compliance with a February 19, 2024, Supreme Court order, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) uploaded the State Expert Committee (SEC) reports on its web site earlier in April. This interim order was in response to a public interest litigation difficult the constitutionality of the Forest (Conservation) Act Amendment (FCAA) 2023. A key concern within the petition was that the standing of unclassed forests, which have been to be recognized by the state SEC reports, wasn’t identified or if they’d been recognized in any respect.
With the enactment of FCAA, these unclassed forests — which have authorized safety beneath the landmark case T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad (1996) — would lose this safety, main to their inevitable diversion. The SEC reports have been to be ready in pursuance of the order, which specified that ‘forests’ as per their dictionary which means and all classes of forests irrespective of possession and notification standing can be included beneath the ambit of the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980. As a end result, unclassed forests, a.okay.a. deemed forests, would additionally require the Central authorities approval in case a mission proponent sought to divert that land for non-forest use, after a number of different layers scrutiny.
Unclassed or deemed forests might belong to forests, income, railways and different authorities entities, group forests or these beneath personal possession, however usually are not notified. SECs have been to establish all such forests throughout the nation by means of out there data i.e. Forest Working Plans, Revenue land data, and many others., and by bodily identification of any land patch having the character of forests as per dictionary which means regardless of its possession.
The lacking forests
The standing of the reports have been unknown from 1996 till they shot again into prominence when the MoEFCC instructed a Joint Parliamentary Committee — appointed to study the proposed regulation — that the SECs had recognized unclassed forests that had been taken on document.
This was in response to stinging criticism that the proposed regulation undermined the Godavarman judgement and would exclude all unclassed forest land from its purview. The MoEFCC had assured the Committee that “the amended Act would be applicable” to the SEC-identified unclassed forests, stressing that the proposed modification “was in line with the Godavarman judgement”.
But in response to an RTI utility filed on January 17, 2024, the MoEFCC stated it “did not have the requisite reports”. How then had it taken the reports “on record” and warranted a parliamentary committee that the amended Act would shield deemed forests recognized by the SECs? The Ministry had successfully proposed to shield forests however it didn’t know the place they have been.
Following the February order, the MoEFCC uploaded the SEC reports on its web site, however nothing has modified. In reality, the reports reveal a grim image: no state has supplied verifiable knowledge on the identification, standing, and site of unclassed Forests in its remit.
In reality, seven states and Union Territories — Goa, Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Ladakh, Lakshadweep, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal — seem not to have constituted the SEC in any respect. Ladakh stated “no order was available” from the erstwhile Jammu & Kashmir state to represent an SEC, and has solely now fashioned one. Twenty-three states have shared their reports however solely 17 are in step with the Supreme Court’s directives, the legality of the remaining in query. Puducherry stated its report is “not traceable”.
Disagreement with FSI
Many states have stated the one month supplied by the apex court docket was too quick and “the nature of work voluminous”, and consequently haven’t undertaken ground-truthing, bodily cadastral surveys, and demarcation of unclassed forest lands.
Instead, most states have both used present forest and income division knowledge; some, like Manipur and Sikkim, have merely quoted figures from the Forest Survey of India. In Haryana’s report, neither the information supply nor the date of its creation is unclear.
Only 9 states supplied the extent of unclassed forests. Most states and UTs solely shared the extent of differing kinds of forest areas specified within the order: beneath authorities possession, both with forest or income and in a number of circumstances beneath different authorities departments. Some states additionally detailed the extent of unclassed forests, or these which were degraded, cleared or encroached however that is inconsistent. There isn’t any readability whether or not knowledge has been comprehensively extracted from the out there data, go away alone the bodily and geographical location of these forests. A topo sheet identification (a map exhibiting a area’s pure and artifical options) can be not out there.
Lack of diligence
Also, virtually no state or UT specified the geographic places of forests. Any figuring out geographical data of forest land, the place given, is simply of reserve or protected forests, which isn’t helpful as a result of this data is already out there with Forest Departments. Only Tripura supplied khatian (or khata) numbers for forest areas past the forests on document; nevertheless, the land classification is unclear.
The SEC reports additionally query the veracity of the reports of the Forest Survey of India, the one authorities company to survey and assess forests. A putting instance comes from Gujarat, whose SEC report says its unclassed forests cowl 192.24 sq. km whereas the Survey has reported the considerably greater 4,577 sq. km (1995-1999). An analogous inconsistency canines Assam, the place the SEC report states the extent of unclassed forest space to be 5,893.99 sq. km whereas the FSI has reported 8,532 sq. km.
The remedy of SECs with out on-ground verification is probably going to have resulted within the large-scale destruction of forests — which ought to have been recognized, demarcated, and guarded 27 years in the past. But with no baseline knowledge from 1996-1997, we don’t know how a lot unclassed forest has been misplaced.
For instance, Kerala’s SEC didn’t embrace areas such because the Pallivasal unreserve, an ecologically fragile space in Munnar; this space was additionally devastated throughout the 2018 floods. The report additionally failed to point out Chinnakanal unreserve, an necessary elephant hall in Munnar at present overrun by intensive business tourism. This space has reported many cases of human-elephant conflicts, together with of late the tragic story of ‘Arikomban’.
Consequences of pushing FCAA
The loss of such forests is probably going to be a recurring theme in all states, and desires to be investigated. It can be clear the reports have been unexpectedly put collectively, utilizing incomplete and unverified knowledge collected from available data, and submitted to the Supreme Court so as to fulfil their obligations.
The Godavarman order of the SC was to be carried out in letter and spirit to shield the nation’s forests and ecological safety, and to be adopted by means of even after submitting the SEC reports. The failure to do it is a misplaced alternative to obtain the necessities of the Indian Forest Policy, which envisages 33.3% forest cowl in plains and 66.6% within the hills.
The Forest Survey of India’s 2021 report reveals an total 21% forest cowl (which specialists have disputed) within the nation and 40% in hills. Approximately 900 sq. km — greater than twice the world of Chennai — has been misplaced within the final cycle of the Survey’s assessment.
Promulgating the FCAA with out inspecting the SEC reports shows a scarcity of diligence on the MoEFCC’s half and could have horrible penalties for India’s ecosystems and ecological safety. Those accountable want to be held to account, and the nationwide authorities wants to take ameliorative motion to re-identify, retrieve, and shield forest areas as per the 1996 judgement.
Prakriti Srivastava is an IFS officer who retired as PCCF, Kerala, in 2023 and has served as DIG (wildlife) within the MoEFCC as effectively. Prerna Singh Bindra is former member, National Board for Wildlife, and an writer. Krithika Sampath is a researcher in conservation social sciences with a grasp’s in conservation ecology from the University of Michigan.