Checks and balances in forest management

The Forest Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2023, seeks to expand the list of activities permitted to be carried out on forest land and exempts certain types of land from the purview of the Forest Conservation Act. Pushing the bill without adequate stakeholder consultation runs the risk of tampering with the checks and balances ensured by the existing Forest Conservation Act, 1980, against rampant and arbitrary diversion of forest by project developers. The bill introduced in the Lok Sabha in March was subsequently referred to the Joint Committee of Parliament for examination. One of the key reasons behind the proposed amendment listed by the Central Government is the “need to fast track the strategic and security-related projects of national importance so as to ensure the development of vital security infrastructures, especially along the international border areas such as the Line of Actual Control, Line of Control, and Left Wing Extremism-affected areas.” If the amendments are accepted, this will have wide ramifications for forest areas in the northeast region, which has 98% international borders. The bill proposes that forest land situated within a distance of 100 kilometres along international borders, or the Line of Control or Line of Actual Control, as the case may be, that is proposed to be used for the construction of strategic linear projects of national importance and concerning national security shall not be covered under the purview of the amended Act. This implies that no prior forest clearance will be required for such projects subject to such terms and conditions, including the conditions of planting trees to compensate for the felling of trees undertaken on the lands, as the Central Government may, by guidelines, specify. The bill lacks clarity on how rampant destruction of forests along the international border, which have very rich biodiversity, is going to be checked in the name of constructing strategic projects without adequate legal provision to act against rampant destruction. The consequences of indiscriminate felling of trees all along international borders in the region will result in irreversible ecological destruction and add to the adverse climate change impact in the region. Fast tracking of strategic infrastructure projects such as roads, bridges, and telecommunications in the border regions is a critical security requirement that the country cannot afford to ignore. With China aggressively pushing such infrastructure projects along the LAC, expeditious implementation of infrastructure projects along the border has become an urgent necessity. However, by improving the forest clearance system and building the capacity of regulators such as the National Board of Wildlife, the Forest Advisory Committee, etc., indiscriminate forest diversion for such projects can be checked. One way of augmenting the capacities of regulators can be the constitution of separate cells within the national bodies for regions like the Northeast with an adequate number of experts. If such a system is put into place, forest clearance for projects of strategic nature within 100 km of international borders is not required to be clubbed with other pending projects and can be cleared separately and quickly. It will at least ensure that, apart from meeting the strategic needs of the country, forest conservation goals will also be met by these projects. The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, provides that prior permission of the Central Government is required for de-reservation of forest land, use of forest land for non-forest purposes, assignment of forest land by way of lease to private entities, and clearing of naturally grown trees for the purpose of reafforestation. The government seeks to expand the list of activities for non-forest purposes and include ecotourism, the establishment of zoos and safaris, and silvicultural operations, including regeneration operations, which will open forest areas other than the protected areas for private investors. The government justifies broadening the horizons of the Act and explains in the Statements of Objects and Reasons of the Bill that new challenges relating to ecological, social, and environmental developments, such as mitigating the impact of climate change, achieving the national targets of net zero emissions by 2070, and maintaining or enhancing the forest carbon stock, have emerged at national and international levels. Allowing forest land to be taken on lease by private entities to increase the forest or tree cover for the creation of a carbon sink of an additional 2.5 to 3.0 billion metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2030 will lead to commercial exploitation of forest land, and in the process, the forest-dependent communities that have been playing a critical role in the conservation of forests could be deprived of the economic benefits of the global carbon trading market unless the bill provides for a special provision to prevent it. Forest, environment, climate experts, and environment groups decoding the bill for laypersons will facilitate the submission of adequate representation from the northeast region from the public in general and non-government organisations and institutions in particular to the JPC on the bill so that various apprehensions over the proposed amendments can be adequately addressed in the report of the parliamentary panel.