Adding green cover or a threat? The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, explained

Is India’s forest cover under threat? That’s what experts are asking after the Lok Sabha on Wednesday passed the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill-2023. Amid the din of introducing a no-confidence motion against the Narendra Modi-led government, the lower house of Parliament briefly discussed the bill and then passed it amid sloganeering and waving of placards in the well of the House. Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav said in Lok Sabha on Wednesday, “The primary objective of this Bill is to increase the forest area of the country to meet our goals of conservation of forests, conservation of biodiversity and the challenges posed by climate change… That is why we have decided to drop the English word ‘forest’ and replaced it with van sanrakshan aur samvardhan, which is closer to the vocabulary of our people.” For the unaware, the Bill is now being called Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, which translates to Forest (Conservation and Augmentation) Act. However, there are many environment experts who fear that greenlighting this legislation will threaten the forest cover of the country. Let’s take a closer look at what the Bill entails and why has it sparked widespread concern? What does the law say? The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill-2023 is meant to amend the parent legislation, known as the Forest Conservation Act of 1980. A key factor of this law was that state governments were prohibited from diverting any forest land for non-forest purposes, except with the nod of the Centre. Additionally, anyone who sought to oppose the state’s order on this could file an appeal before the National Green Tribunal. Also read: Forest, tree cover in India up by 2,261 sq km in two years: Key takeaways from the forest report However, under the new law certain kinds of infrastructure and development projects will be exempted from getting forest clearance. As per the new law, these include, “strategic linear projects of national importance and concerning national security” situated within 100 km of international borders. The Bill states that the following categories of forest land will no longer enjoy legal protection: – Land, up to 0.10 hectares, alongside a rail track or a public road. – Land within 100 kilometres of the International Border, Line of Control or Line of Actual Control. Such land must be proposed to be used for the “construction of strategic linear project of national importance and concerning national security”. – Up to 10 hectares of land that is proposed to be used for setting up security-related infrastructure. – Up to five hectares of land in an area affected by left-wing extremism. This land needs to be earmarked to set up a defence-related project, a camp for paramilitary forces or a public utility project, as may be specified by the Centre. The legislation clearly states that these types of land can be exempt on the condition that trees are planted elsewhere to make up for the felling of the trees in these areas. [caption id=“attachment_12921582” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] Elephants roman inside a forest in Assam. Many environmentalists claim that the new Bill would open up forest land for commercial exploitation. File image/AP[/caption] What’s the problem though? Environmentalists and tribals are wary of this legislation though. They claim that the Bill would open up forest land for commercial exploitation. Forest officials have said that they are worried about the exemption of the 100 km of forest in border areas for strategic purposes. Former Principal Chief Conservator of Forests BK Singh in a report by The Scroll said that this would encompass the entire North East region of India and the majority of the Himalayan region, both of which are ecologically sensitive and home to several wildlife species. Experts also opine that the Bill takes away the supremacy of the Village Committee. For instance, in the past, for any linear project like roads or drainage, permission was required to be taken from the Village Committee. However, now, according to the experts, the Government can start doing non-forest activity on a forest land without taking permission from the Village Committee. They can give contract to any private company and can settle them on that land. Some argue that the amendment has also redefined forests, which contradicts the orders of the Supreme Court in TN Godavarman Thirumulkpad versus Union Of India case of 12 December 1996. They also contend that the government’s plan of planting trees elsewhere as compensation is also not practical. Satyajit Sarna, a lawyer, wrote in The Quint, “Only in an absurdist comedy could planting trees in Haryana compensate for the feeling of primeval old-growth rainforest on the Nicobar Islands. But to the bean counters, any tree is a tree, and its existence anywhere is sufficient to balance the books. As a consequence, tree cover in India is depicted to have risen while dense forests have receded.” Environmentalists add that forests are much more than just a tract of green cover. They state that natural forests perform a range of services that are necessary to the survival and well-being of million of species that they support. Furthermore, they play an important role in the livelihood and subsistence of crores of people. [caption id=“attachment_12921602” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] A forest in Sikkim. The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill-2023 is meant to amend the parent legislation, known as the Forest Conservation Act of 1980. Image used for representational purposes.[/caption] Earlier in July, more than 100 former civil servants had written to Parliament, expressing their concern with the Forest Conservation (Amendment) Bill, 2023. The group has said they are worried both by the contents of the Bill and the process being followed in passing it. They also alluded to the ineffectiveness of compensatory afforestation in their letter. They wrote: “Such an expectation is unrealistic given the fact that large tracts of existing natural forests will be diverted for non-forest use. There are ample studies which suggest that natural forests are forty times more efficient as carbon sinks than newly planted forests. Moreover, the results of compensatory afforestation, as of today, have not been rosy. Between 2008 and 2019, an area equal to only 72 per cent of the diverted forest area was brought under compensatory afforestation; moreover, 24 per cent of this was on existing, but degraded, forest land.”

What the government says? Despite the stiff opposition, the government stands firmly with the proposed law, saying it is the need of the hour. The Centre states that such a Bill will enable it to fast-track strategic and security related projects of national importance so as to ensure development of vital security infrastructures, especially along the international border areas such as Line of Actual Control, Line of Control and Left-Wing Extremism affected areas. With inputs from agencies