The protagonists of the Bill now wants to jeopardize remaining forests. The entire water regime in peninsular India is dependent upon the health of the watershed forests.The dry weather flow of the Bhagirathi at Tehri is six percent of the peak season flow. All the forests of Uttar Kashi and Tehri Garhwal Districts which protect the Bhagirathi catchment have disappeared. The dry weather flow of the Narmada at Hoshangabad is 12.5 per cent of the peak season flow.The forests of the upper and middle reaches of the Narmada are still relatively safe, though under immense biotic pressure.The minute this biotic pressure takes the form of privatizing these forests by handing over possession of parcels of two and a half hectares each to the tribals they, too, will disappear and the dry season flow will become zero. Peninsular India has no snow and the rivers are not fed by snowmelt. They are fed by precipitation.The Scheduled Tribes (Recognition of Forest Rights) Bill, 2005, is certainly not aimed at protecting the watershed forests. It is unfortunate that this Bill is being opposed only on the basis of protection of wild life. Sanctuaries in Rajasthan are isolated oases of forest growth in the midst of a parched and desert landscape. Naturally the surrounding villages eye the forests with envy and there is immense pressure for cattle to go and graze in these forests. The habitat is too small to really protect wildlife.Wildlife can only be protected if the habitat is increased by aggressive afforestation.The tiger is more likely to survive in MP where there are forests outside the national parks and there is elbow room for wildlife than it is in a state such as Rajasthan. Wildlife is not a phenomenon by itself. It is an indicator of the health of the forests and if the forests decline, which they will, if they are parceled out to people, then wildlife will disappear. The real purpose of this Bill comes out in para 2.3 of the note of the Committee of the Secretaries. Basically it is to circumvent the decisions of the Supreme Court in the Godavarman case and to legalise encroachment.That this will encourage further encroachment is axiomatic.That, however, is what the activists NGOs want. Madhya Pradesh was the first state to have started the Dahi model in which degraded forest lands were allotted to tribals in Dhar District. The programme failed largely because the only interest of the beneficiaries was to plant crops, however meagre the yield.Except for national parks and sanctuaries our tribals have always had the right to collect minor forest produce from the forest.Tendu Patta is a rich source of income. Prior to nationalisation of the Tendu Patta trade in 1976 in MP unscrupulous people would go to a village, bribe the patel or sarpanch with a durrie, a petromax or a few hundred rupees and extract all the tendu patta in the area from both government and private lands. After nationalisation this pernicious practice was stopped and today the government passes on about rupees two hundred and fifty crores per year to the villagers. It is a canard that the Forest Department does not allow collection of MFP. I find some of the provisions of the proposed Bill laughable. For example section 4 (6) (i) states that the land will not be used for commercial purpose. Section 5 (a) says that clearing of forest land and felling of trees will not be permitted and the people will have to protect the wildlife. The entire burden of Malik Makbuza Timber, i.e., trees growing on private land, has fallen on the State with the Supreme Court howling for the blood of officers for permitting the felling of such trees. Under this weak and namby-pamby Bill which forest officer will have the courage to stop a tribal from doing what he is not supposed to do? He will turn around and say that he is the owner and the forest officer should go and jump in a lake. Anyone who has seen the annual Bastar ‘parad’ would know that the whole community collects in an area, surrounds the entire forest and drives all wildlife, mammal, avifauna and reptiles, into a small killing ground, where everything is slaughtered. Even today if a tribal in Bastar sees a rat or a squirrel on a tree he will go to any extent to bring it down, including by felling of the tree.The tribals are a protein- hungry people and for them wildlife is their natural prey.The only community I know that protects wildlife is the Vishnois and they are not tribals.Lest I be misunderstood let me make it clear that our forests cannot be saved by mere policing by the Forest Department.There has to be very active community participation in the management of the forests and the people who live in and around the forest must benefit from these forests so that they develop a stake in the health of the forests.This cannot be done by privatizing the forests in little plots, not one of which can sustain life by itself.It is only a combination of agriculture, afforestation, harvesting and management of the forests and using forest produce for value addition activities which can give livelihood to the people.The present Bill will take away whatever little livelihood is left and a few years down the line those of us who are still living will beat our heads against the wall and bemoan the fate of our forests.Forests are too serious a matter to be left to the activists alone. The voice of the foresters and genuine environmentalist must be heeded. Concluded The writer is chairman, National Centre for Human Settlement and Environment, Bhopal PART I
