ARUNACHAL Pradesh is one of the greenest states in India. Yet
today, despite having only seven persons to a square kilometre
and about 8.4 million ha of rich vegetation, the state is gravely
threatened by deforestation.
Forest officials claim an almost 14 per cent increase in
forest cover between 1980 and 1987. About half this increase can
be attributed to the inclusion of areas which satellite images
could not analyse before because of cloud cover. But it still
means a real increase of 4,87,000 ha.
But the situation on the ground is far from happy. A large
part of the state's revenue is generated directly from its
forests. A note prepared by the Arunachal Pradesh Forest
Corporation (APFC) in March 1988 states that "90 per cent of the
state's direct revenue is generated by its forests besides
indirect revenue in the form of allocable excise duty available
mainly through the plywood industry".
With few opportunities for growth, the state has become
heavily dependent on external assistance. Only 0.7 per cent of
its total revenue comes from within the state, while as much as
90 per cent comes from the Centre. The per capita share of plan
investment for an Arunachal Pradesh tribal, at Rs 8,511, is the
highest in the country today, way above the national average of
Rs 1,493. Despite this, only a small minority of the tribals
have profited from the lucrative timber trade.
With no industrial base to speak of, more than 75 per cent
of Arunachal Pradesh's population is dependent on agriculture for
their livelihood. A few get government jobs, thanks to
reservation quotas, or find employment in the transport and
communication sectors.
Clearly, the easy road to riches is through timber
operations. It was during the 1980s that forestry emerged as one
of the major contributors to the state's net domestic product
(NDP), its share rising from 12 per cent in 1980-81 to around 20
per cent today. The road construction sector, the most organised
enterprise in the state, serves to provide better access to
hitherto untouched forests.
The growing demand for timber has created an elite which
wields immense political clout. Forests have become so valuable
that not only are the state government and the local elite vying
for greater control over them, but neighbouring states have also
laid claims to them. This has heightened social tension in the
area.
When market forces initially penetrated the forests of
Arunachal Pradesh, a situation akin to the California gold rush
was created. In 1988, it was proposed at a conference of state
forest ministers that the Arunachal Pradesh government concede to
a ban on timber operations. The loss in revenue, estimated at Rs
80 crore, would be met by the Centre. But the proposal was
turned down by the state.
This is not surprising considering the strong timber lobby in
the state. Between 1970 and 1985, the number of saw mills in the
state rose from 15 to 67, while plywood units increased from five
to 13. The constantly rising demand for veneer, sleepers and
other industrial products from wood aided in the faster depletion
of forest resources creating, in the process, a serious raw
material crunch.
Today, about one-third of the total installed capacity of
Arunachal Pradesh's plywood industry is unutilised. The Norbu saw
mill in Shergaon, West Kameng district, is now using only 50 per
cent of its installed capacity. The Mamang Borang saw and veneer
mill in Pasighat remains functional for only 200 days in a year.
The plywood mills in Deomali have even started importing
Malaysian timber.
Almost all the timber units are concentrated in the Tirap
and Lohit districts, which has all but destroyed the hollock
(Terminalia myriocarpia) and hollong (Dipterocarpus gracilis)
forests unique to this region. The soft wood of the hollong makes
it eminently suitable for making plywood. As a result, the tree
has been subjected to ruthless felling. So extensive has been the
deforestation here that it is feared that the hollong will become
extinct in another 10 to 15 years.
Nahar (Mesua ferrea) is another dominant component of the
wet, evergreen forests of eastern parts of the state. These trees
have been ruthlessly cut down to make railway sleepers. Between
1982 and 1984, 40 per cent of sleepers were supplied by these
nahar forests.
Timber is also a political asset in the state and has
spawned a great deal of corruption. In July 1989, the opposition
had even alleged that chief minister Gegong Apang was granting
"saw and plywood mill licences to the opposition MLAs to lure
them to join the Congress". The then vice-president of the state
Janata Dal, Norbu Thangu, accused the state government of "living
by selling tree permits".
More recently, the ministry of environment and forests has
received reports about the involvement of top officials in the
destruction and plunder of the region's forest cover. On the
basis of this, an inquiry was ordered by the minister of
environment and forests, Kamal Nath. He is now scrutinising the
report.
Corruption manifests itself in different ways. A tree
plantation cultivated as part of a social forestry project near
Ganga Market in Itanagar was cleared to make way for a shopping
complex under "minister's orders". In January 1991, confiscated
timber worth Rs 40 lakh was discovered near a forest checkpost
near Zero Point in West Kameng district.
Ingenious ways have been found to evade rules. As a tribal
in Daporijo revealed, often the girth sanctioned in a permit for
one tree is used to smuggle through many trees of a smaller
girth, logged together to make them appear a single tree. Even
without such ingenuity, more trees are felled than permitted. In
1990, about Rs 22 lakh was collected as fines for illegal
logging in the Pasighat forest division alone, according to local
sources.
Tree permits are routinely issued to those holding rights
for the felling and sale of trees. Prior to 1980, the divisional
forest officer was empowered to approve the number of permits to
be issued in accordance with revenue targets. Since then, the
quota system was introduced to check the alarming rise in
felling. Every year, the state cabinet fixes the number of
permits to be issued and quotas are allotted to different forest
divisions.
Nevertheless, the timber lobby very often succeeds in
thwarting the forest department's rules by applying political
pressure. In the Bomdila forest division, the number of permits
issued prior to 1990 varied from 50 to 86, but in 1990-91 as many
as 200 permits were issued. The denuded slopes of Bomdila,
capable of supporting only shrubs and chir pine trees, do not
merit such an unprecedented rise in permits.
In some forest divisions, the total quota of permits is
equally distributed among the various electoral constituencies,
with the local MLA deciding the final names, rather than the
divisional forest officer.
Unfortunately, resistance to such practices, apart from
isolated voices of dissent, has been few and far between. In the
summer of 1990, for instance, group violence broke out in the
forest division of West Kameng district when the villagers of
Khupi stopped the movement of logs through their territory in a
bid to stop the timber operations of the Pallizi saw mill.
Technically, only local people are allowed to hold tree
permits and licences to set up saw and plywood mills. But in
practice, outsiders buy up these licences or enter into
partnerships with licence-holders. Today, the entire timber
economy is being run and managed by entrepreneurs from outside
the state.
Although the local tribals are making a lot of money out of
these ventures, the lion's share of the profits is flowing out of
the state. But chief minister Apang sees this as a "transitory
phase". "Our people are poor and do not have enough money for
investment. Therefore, we will have to let outsiders come in
with their capital. A time will come when we will be able to
manage our industry on our own," says Apang.
But other government officials are not so optimistic. In
fact, there is concern over new forms of social tension in
the area. Some of the saw mills located near the reserve forest
are allotted quotas, but those located in the unclassed state
forest area are entirely dependent on tree permit-holders for
their raw material.
Timber merchants who have come from outside the state and
have made large investments, are very unhappy over the
operational constraints on their trade. Their legal status
within Arunachal Pradesh is that of managers. If the actual
owner of the enterprise -- the permit-holder -- decides to take
over the business, the person who has actually put in the capital
cannot demand its return legally. While local tribals may not
resort to such measures as yet, their demands for money and
services have been steadily increasing.
Saw-mill owners in the West Kameng district complain that
they have to often provide vehicles, free of cost, on social and
ceremonial occasions as well as for general transportation. On
an average, mill vehicles ply on the roads for about 160 days in
a year to cater to this "public demand". They also have to
provide timber free of cost to the villagers.
Complicated ownership claims over forest land are another
source of tension in the area. In the Apatani valley, forest land
is becoming increasingly privatised. Local tribals are now
asserting hereditary ownership rights over the forest area. Vast
tracts are now being claimed as individual property where even
other villagers are denied entry. Boundary disputes, often
leading to violence, have become commonplace.
While the tribals claim absolute right over the land and
forests, the state also claims ownership rights over them. Lax
legislation, which classifies vast forest areas as unclassed
state forests, complicates the situation further
.
Forest officials feel that customary laws make the
management of unclassed state forests difficult. They are
hesitant to enforce forestry programmes in the area for fear of
incurring the tribal community's wrath. "Unclassed state
forests," says one official, "have become a no man's land,
subjected to open plunder." While tree permits are issued to
harvest timber, little is invested for its management. The
officials find it difficult to acquire this class of forest as
the tribals perceive it as an infringement on their traditional
rights.
The relationship between the forest department and the
tribals has always been antagonistic, since the department
has the power to reserve vast tracts of forest land which means
the abrogation of all customary rights. The tribals resent this.
Says Chenging, a farmer of Poma village, near Itanagar,
"Elephants do not pay royalty for uprooting trees in the forest.
Why should I pay royalty?"
Today, the demand for dereservation of forest land in
Pasighat, Roing division, and some other areas is being
articulated politically. Take Deomali township, in Tirap
district, which developed within reserve forests covering
approximately 200 ha of land. It will soon be dereserved. This
area was developed in the 1960s when the chiefs of the Namsang
and Borduria villages were persuaded to part with their hollong
forest for reservation, on the condition that they would share
the profits from the forest with the state.
The forests around the district headquarters and the state
capital are under the most pressure. These townships are facing an
acute scarcity of land with built-up area slowly encroaching upon
their green fringes, threatening the plantations raised by the
forest department at some places.
The story of Along town best illustrates this development.
When this government outpost was established under the British,
it was on land donated by Panya villagers. Today, the villagers
resent the fact that outsiders are buying up their panikheti
(irrigated terraces) land. They are now demanding plots in the
town in lieu of agricultural land. The clamour for land in Along
town has become so intense that the forest department's social
forestry plantation here has been dug up to build houses. If
the encroachment continues, the Gaur Hill Station Reserve will
be completely destroyed.
How green is green
Forest cover in Arunachal Pradesh 1972-1987 | |||||
Year | Total forest cover (m ha) | Dense forest cover (m ha) | Open forest cover (m ha) | Percentage of geographical area | Uninterpreted area (m ha) |
1972-75 | 5.14 | 5.05 | 0.10 | 61.5 | 1.96 |
1980-82 | 6.05 | 5.11 | 0.94 | 61.13 | 0.53 |
1985-87 | 6.88 | 5.43 | 1.45 | 64.93 | 0.19 |
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.