During the 1980s the rate of destruction of natural forests was reduced as compared to the 1970s. Most of the deforestation took place in the forests of the dry deciduous zone
Fallacy in figure
THE FAO assessment claims that in 1990, India had a
forest cover of 70.63 mha, of which 51.73 mha were natural
forests and plantations another 18.90 mha. A similar
FAO study regarding the 1980 forest cover had claimed
that then India had a forest cover of 60.42 mha of which
natural forests were 57.23 mha and plantations were
3.18 mha. So, according to FAO, the country's tree cover
has gone up by over 10 mha - almost one million hectare a
year during the 1980s.
While the natural forest cover went down, the area under
plantations went up dramatically. After the first set of data
regarding India's forest cover in 1980, FAO conducted a fresh
exercise to estimate the forest cover for both 1980 and 1990
simultaneously. These estimates were made around 1990 and
from one set of data sources so that the two data for 1980 and
1990 would be comparable.
FAO believes that it has now got better baseline data
for 1980. The natural forest cover in 1980 according To
the organisation was only 55.119 mha as compared to
57.234 mha estimated earlier. When the two ,new sets of
FAO data relating to 1980 and 1990 are compared, it becomes
clear that while the area under natural forests has gone
down by 3.39 mha over the 1980s - an erosion rate of
about one-third of a million hectare a year - plantations
increased in area by 15.72 mha, an increase of about 500 per
cent. The actual increase in the plantation area may actually
not be as high.
In a more recent study, the FAO has explained that the
18.9 mha of plantation area is the 'reported area', which is
usually based on numbers of trees planted or delivered from
nurseries. Since studies available worldwide indicate that the
actual or net plantation area is usually 70 per cent of the
reported area, FAO now estimates the 1990 plantation area for
India to be 13.23 mha.
The sum and substance of all the figures cited by FAO is
that while the plantation area in India is' increasing, its
natural forest cover is going down. This data, thus, forces
us to reach two conclusions. One, that India's forest managers
are allowing plantations to increase at the expense of the
natural forest cover. Two, that precious little changed between
the 1970s and the 1980s in terms of the destruction of
natural forests despite the enormous interest that the environ-
mental community took in forestry issues in the 1980s,
the creation of a full-fledged ministry of environment
and forests, and the enactment of the Forest Conservation
Act in 1980 with a subsequent amendment a few years later to strengthen the law.
FAO, however, states in its Forest Resource Assessment 1990,
that it did not assess any area of closed broadleaved forests.
The information supplied was taken from a special study
on the state of logging (see graph: Natural forests trail). The
given estimate of the closed broadleaved forest - 28.747 mha
in 1990 - therefore, is not a reliable estimate especially as
there is considerable discrepancy in this data. In 1980, the
area under closed broadleaved forests was reported to be as
much as 46.044 mha.
The FAO report quotes The State of Forest Report 1987
to state that as much as 59 mba out of the total 75 mba
area under the control of the state forest departments in India is
covered by working plans. While numerous environmentalists
have consistently argued that working plans, ironically, betray
their name and do not actually work, the FAO report argues
that "by and large, prescriptions of the working plans have been adhered to".
But the report admits that once these forest areas are logged, there is very little regeneration. Adequate regeneration has taken place on less than one-sixth (15 per cent) of the area logged under the working plans. The three reasons that are given by Indian foresters for this abysmal rate of regeneration are - open grazing, inadequate fire protection and heavy firewood collection which exceeds the natural annual increment.
This simply boils down to the fact that forest authorities
in India are themselves actively involved in logging forests,
totally disregarding people's biomass needs. As logging considerably reduces biomass availability, continued pressure
of the people on the forests to meet their survival needs
naturally suppresses any kind of regeneration. The picture
that emerges is that if state-owned forest lands were managed
for ecological needs and for the survival needs of the local
communities only, in accordance with the National Forest
Policy of 1987, then these lands should not be brought
under working plans and logged.
Thirdly, the FAO report points out that India has the
world's largest area under plantations today, something
that most environmentalists in India are not aware of.
The total plantation area reported by 90 countries of the
tropical zone amounted to a total of 43.8 mha in 1990. Of
this, India alone had 18.9 mha or 43 per cent of the tropical
world's total. The next four countries with large plantation
areas in 1990 were Indonesia, Brazil, Vietnam and Thailand.
The four combined just about match the Indian area under plantations.
Nothing is known about how much of the plantation area projected by FAO (see graph: Topper) is in the
state-owned forest lands, non-forest government lands
like revenue lands, panchayat lands or private farmlands. S N Rai, director of the Forest Survey of India,
recently told a Planning Commission meeting that
most of this plantation area in India consists of farm
forests, which indeed was the only successful component of the massive afforestation programme launched
in the early 1980s with the assistance of the World Bank
and various other bilateral agencies, under the title of
social forestry.
According to N C Saxena, who served as a senior officer with the National Wastelands Development
Board, some 18 billion trees were planted in the country between 1980 and 1988, of which 10 billion trees (equivalent to an area of five mha) were planted on farmlands (see graph: Tree tales).
Between 1990-91 and 1995-96, some 5.571 mha of public
lands were afforested and another 6.9649 billion seedlings
(equivalent to an area of 3.48 mha) were distributed for planting on private lands. In recent years, however, this programme
of farm forestry has received lesser attention from the government. As available figures clearly show (see graph: Bad report), the annual targets for farm forestry have been consistently going down.
A major reason for the decline in farm forestry was that
neither the MEF nor the state forest departments made any
efforts towards understanding the volume of the wood market
in India or to influence wood prices in such a manner that
farmers would not lose out financially.
With the liberalisation of pulp imports, many tree farmers
plucked out their seedlings because of resistance from pulp
mills and falling prices. The government too, did not stop its
subsidised supplies and farmwood began to come into the
market, thus depressing prices further. But why do the state of
forest reports fail to show the area under plantations as distinct from the natural forest area like the FAO surveys, is
indeed, a very disturbing question.
Says Rai, "This is because the assessment of forest cover is
based on the interpretation of satellite data. Differentiating
between natural forests and plantations is difficult because
reflectance of the two is same. Moreover, young plantations,
plantations of thorny species and those with yellowish or reddish leaves do not also give proper reflectance." Obviously
good data collection mechanisms for assessing India's forest
covers are needed in the government.
During the 1990s, several state government
have started pushing the Joint Forest Management
(JFM) concept. After the early successes of this concept in West Bengal during the 1980s in which
people were involved' in the regeneration of
degraded forest lands, the JFM programme was
supported by the Union government and subsequently it spread to several states. According to the
Society for Promotion of Wastelands
Development in New Delhi, an assessment made
by the organisation in 1994 had revealed that there
were about 15,000 village committees involved in
JFM covering some 1.5 mha (at an assumed rate of
100 ha per committee).
Since then, Andhra Pradesh has set up
some 400 committees, Madhya Pradesh 6,000
committees and Rajasthan 1,700 committees
while Uttar Pradesh has some 400 van panchayats
(village forest councils). Thus, there are about
24,000 village committees today. This gives us
the approximate area covered by the JFM scheme
as 2.4 mha.
Forests regenerated under the JFM would not
be considered as plantations, but as regenerated
natural forests, although of a low quality.
Unfortunately, the eagerness with which forest
departments pushed farm forestry in the 1980s,
was not displayed in pushing community-managed natural regeneration in the 1990s.
Otherwise, India would have been blessed
with a two-pronged effort to increase its tree
cover - one to bring about a natural forest
cover in degraded forest lands, and the other to
bring about plantations in degraded private and
revenue lands.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.