NEW DELHI, Dec 26 – In a poor reflection of endeavour of the North-eastern states, all the states in the region including Assam have missed targets of compensatory aforestation, even as questions have been raised about the manner in which the Supreme Court’s direction has been interpreted. For all the tall promises made by these States to conserve its forest resources, it has little achievements to show for results, if the accomplishment of compensatory aforestation is anything to go by. Worse still State like Manipur has not even bothered to prepare a working plan to conserve forest, while Nagaland has no achievement to its credit. The results forced the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Environment and Forest to press the alarm bells suggesting that there was an urgent need for the States to fulfill their commitments for achieving targets for the compensatory aforestation under Forest Conservation Act.
As on September, barring Sikkim none of the States in the Region even came near achieving the compensatory aforestation targets. For instance, Assam was set a target of 2,338 hectares whereas it could achieve a target of 1,377 hectares only. Similarly Arunachal Pradesh was given a target of 5,085 hectares, it achieved 2,014 hectares and Mizoram achieved a target of 3,977 hectares as against a target of 8,574 hectares. A review of the various Supreme Court decisions with regard to the forest of North-eastern states should be undertaken with the state representatives and progress of working plan preparations for the forest and non-forest areas be conducted on a quarterly basis, a concerned Parliamentary Committee recommended.
The Standing Committee’s remarks could create complications for states like Assam, which is desperately trying to make the Supreme Court review its orders on encroachments on forestlands. The Assam government in a bid to convince the apex court as well as the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF) about its intentions launched ambitious projects like Sewji Aamar Dharani Dhunia a forest development economic scheme for rural population aimed at forest regeneration based on community participation. The State government was compelled to launch such schemes after the controversy over the eviction operations from forestland to remove encroachers landed it in serious trouble forcing it halt the drives half-way.
However, the Parliamentary struck a different note as far interpretation of the apex court’s order on forest conservation, development and regeneration were concerned. The Supreme Court’s order merely seeks to enforce the law as laid down by the government. Ban on felling of trees is permitted under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 but only the MoEF has approved a working. However, hardly any state appears to have implemented the provisions. The order was being misinterpreted to bureaucratise forests. Since the order asks for a clear definition and identification of forest, some state governments have taken this as an opportunity to gain control over large areas that remain ‘unclassified’ even today in the North-east, the Parliamentary Committee observed.
Forest officials, who wanted to do away with ‘unclassified’ forests, see this as a chance to alienate local people by claiming ownership, which were otherwise under the control of the community, the Committee contended. In response, the MoEF said that the directions of the Supreme Court that every forest is worked according to a working plan basically goes in the favour of tribal because they continue to get access to the usufruct like fuel, fruits, seeds etc on a sustained basis. It is submitted that out of 620 working plans remaining working are also in the process of preparation and sanction of the schemes for infrastructure support to the forest departments would go a long way to expedite the process.
Significantly, during recent debate on the Wildlife (Protection) Amendment Bill, 2002, the issue of the state-of-affairs of the forest in Assam figured prominently. The Minister of Environment & Forest TR Baalu said that encroachment in the sanctuaries and national parks is a matter of serious concern for bio-diversity conservation and integrity of the area. Hence, the proposal has been made to empower the officials to evict such encroachments. Bijoy Krishna Handique, participating in the debate drew the attention to the man-elephant conflict in Assam as well as in other states, which has taken such a serious dimension that it poses a threat to conservation itself.
‘I know that this is a very delicate situation. The problem has been living with us over a couple of decades, but we failed to resolve it and allowed it to grow to a menacing size. There is a stock reply from the government that the man has encroached upon the elephant’s habitat. Thus, the inference is that the man is to be blamed. There is no doubt about it that the man is to be blamed, Handique said. There are 5,000 wild elephants in Assam. Instances of poaching for ivory in Assam are very rare. There is no poaching for ivory. However, there has been a spurt in the man-elephant conflicts in the past few years, which is a matter of great concern. On an average, about 50 persons are killed every year by wild elephants and 50 incidents of crop-raiding take place every year in the State, he said.
‘Due to continuance of such depredation over the years, there have been some retaliatory killings of wild elephants by people. It is terrible. During the last part of the year 2001, in one incident, the villagers in Sonitpur district killed about 17 wild elephants. It is terrible. It is horrible’, he remarked. The Government should constitute inter-state elephant reserves. There should be resumption of periodical kaeda operation and enhancement of ex gratia payment for injury or loss of life, compensation and insurance cover for crop damage, and involvement of NGOs in the elephant conservation programme. The Government of Assam, besides initiating these steps, is re-sending the proposal for setting up a technology mission for elephant conservation. The State government with limited resources is not in a position to formulate all these steps, he said.
In response, the Minister said that his Ministry has increased the compensation amount to Rs 1 lakh in case of death and Rs 33,000 if a person is injured in the conflict. These are the latest notifications of the Government on the subject. ‘As far as elephant corridors are concerned, we have got four elephant reserves in Assam,’ Baalu said. ‘In the Ninth Plan, we have provided Rs 30 crore for the Project Elephant. In the Tenth Plan, we have provided Rs 60 crore. As far as Assam is concerned, for the current year, we have released Rs 20 lakh. ‘The amount of Rs 25 lakh is for the anti-depredation purpose and Rs 20 lakh for the compensation purpose’, the Minister said.