DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

Project Title: - A study of the forest policy of the British during the Colonial era

Subject: - Environment law

Name of the Faculty: - Dr. Sudha madam

Submitted by: -

B. Uday Reddy

2017128

Section-B

1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Sincerely, I would like to express my sincere thanks to our respected Professor of Environment
law, Dr. Sudha madam, for giving me this golden opportunity to carry out this project in relation
to " A study of the forest policy of the British during the Colonial era ". I have tried
my best to collect information about the project in several possible ways to represent the clear
picture on the given topic.

2
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This project is purely Doctrinal and based on Primary and Secondary sources such as Newspaper
Articles, Websites, Books, Journals and Internet Sources. This Research process deals with
collecting and analyzing information to answer questions. The Research is purely descriptive in
its boundaries of the topic.

3
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……………………………………………………………..2

RESEACRCH METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………3

ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………….5

INTODUCTION………………………………………………………………………..6

1. WHY DEFORESTATION………………………………………………………….7

1.1 Land to be improved……………………………………………………………..

1.2 Sleepers on Tracks………………………………………………………………..

1.3 Plantations………………………………………………………………………..

2. THE RISE OF COMMERCIAL FORESTRY……………………………………8

2.1 How were the lives of People Affected? ………………………………………..

2.2 How did the Forest rules affect Cultivation? ……………………………………

2.3 Who could Hunt? ………………………………………………………………..

2.4 New Trades, New Employments and New Services…………………………….

3. REBELLION IN THE FOREST…………………………………………………13

3.1 The people of Bastar……………………………………………………………..

3.2 The fears of People……………………………………………………………….

4. SOME OF THE IMPORTANT ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES…………….15

4.1 THE SHORE NUISANCES (BOMBAY AND KOLABA) ACT, 1853.............

4.2 THE INDIAN FISHERIES ACT, 1897................................................................

4
4.3 INDIAN FOREST ACT, 1927…………………………………………………...

5. CONDITIONS OF VARIOUS GROUPS OF PEOPLE AFTER THE

CHANGES IN FOREST MANAGEMENT………………………………………23

RESEARCH PROPOSAL ON

A study of the forest policy of the British during the Colonial era

ABSTRACT

TOPIC: - A study of the forest policy of the British during the Colonial era

The Colonial period has a wide range of History for both depletion as well as conservation of
Environment and Wildlife. The Environment in Colonial India has widely explored as a site of
both material and discursive conflicts, often emblematic of broader social and political struggles.
The Colonial Era is water shed in India’s Environmental history in a host of ways, but changes
that were unleashed from the late 19 th century onwards have to be set against a long term
backdrop. States had long assisted in and facilitated Land Colonization and clearance of Marsh,
Jungle and Forest. But the scale and kinds of intervention changed markedly in the Colonial
Period, most sharply with respect to creation of state forests, the control of wild animals as game
and the creation of vast tracks canal irrigated land.

The project takes stock of these Colonial changes and also traces the many dilemmas and choices
in the present, arising from multiple layers of the Imperial Legacy. The Project has most of its
focus on analysis of Environmental Struggles and discourses in Colonial India. It also explains
various schemes executed by British Government to uplift the Environmental Conditions as well
as the policies that degraded Forests in India. We will also discuss some of the important policies

5
like Indian Forest Act, 1927 etc.., This Act was enacted by British Government but it was still
under force.

In the First part, I have touched very briefly on the questions related to the Colonial Legacy,
Chronology and general issues of the Forest policies in India, taking nineteenth and twentieth
century’s as a whole. In the Second part, I have more elaborately dwelt on a few issues on the
making of colonial forest policies in India. The Colonial Legacy is critically judged in this
context. The Project explores some of the evidences over forest and environment in Colonial
Period. Using a general Theory of Ecological History, the Project provides a fresh interpretation
of India’s History.

Books Referred: - 1) “India and the British empire” -- Mahesh Rangarajan

2) “This Fissured Land: An Ecological History of India”—Madhav Gadgil and

Ramachandra Guha

INTRODUCTION

Environmental History is the study of human interaction with natural world over time. It
emphasizes the active role the nature plays in influencing human affairs. Environmental
Historians study how humans both shape their environment and are shaped by it. The
Environmental History tends to focus on particular time-scales, geographic regions, or key
themes..All human civilizations are intimately related to the resources of the lands and waters
they have access to and are affected by. This is because man, more than any other living creature,
has succeeded in eliminating predators, competing animal species and lately even diseases as
factors limiting his populations.

Environmental history in India has generated a rich literature on forests, wildlife, human–animal
conflict, tribal rights and commercial degradation, displacement and development, wildness and
civility, and the ecology versus equity debate.1

1
Mahesh Rangarajan, K. Sivaramakrishnan, India's Environmental History—A Reader: Vol. 1: From Ancient Times
to the Colonial Period; Vol. 2: Colonialism, Modernity, and the Nation

6
Environmental History of Colonial India is a big environmental change in Indian History. It
consists of many policies took up by British to upgrade the environment of India. Their Policies
and enactments brought a huge change to the Indian Environment at that time. Whatever the acts
enacted by them are completely for the welfare of Environment. Though the British have their
own interest of cashing trees but they cultivated trees and secured forests and prevented pollution
of all kinds and made the country pollution free with greenery. We can say that each and every
enactment took up British are for the welfare of Indian Environment from one way or another.

Much of this diversity is rapidly disappearing. Between 1700 and 1995, the period of
industrialisation, 13.9 million sq km of forest or 9.3 percentage of the total area of the world was
authorized for industrial uses, cultivation, pastures and firewood.

WHY DEFORESTATION?

The disappearance of forests is known as deforestation. Deforestation is not a recent problem.

The process started many centuries ago; but under colonial rule it became more systematic and
extensive. Let's look at some of the causes of deforestation in India.

Land to be improved

“By 1600, about one-sixth of India's land mass was under culture. Now that figure has increased
to about half. As a population increased over the centuries and increased demand for food,
peasants extended the limits of cultivation, cleared forests and breaking new lands. In the
colonial period, the crop expanded quickly for a variety of reasons. First, the British directly
encouraged the production of cash crops such as jute, sugar, wheat and cotton. Demand for these
crops increased in the nineteenth century. Europe, where food grains were needed to fuel urban
growth, population and raw materials were needed for industrial production. Second, at the
beginning of the nineteenth century, the state thought forests were unproductive. They were
considered be desert that had to be cultivated so that Land could produce agricultural produce
and income, and improve the state income. Then, between 1880 and 1920, the cultivated area
increased by 6.7 million hectares. We always see the expansion of cultivation as a sign of
progress. But we must not forget that for the land to be subjected to plough, forests must be
cleared”.

7
Sleepers on the Tracks

In the early 19th century, oak forests in England were disappearing. This created a supply
problem for the Royal Navy. How could English ships be built without a regular supply of
Strong and durable wood? How could imperial power be protected? And is it without boats? In
the 1820s, the search parties were sent to explore the forest resources of India. In a decade, trees
were felled on large scale and large quantities of wood were exported from India.

The extension of the railways of the 1850s created a new demand. Railways were essential for
colonial trade and for the movement of imperial troops to run locomotives, wood was needed as
fuel and to place the railway lines, the sleepers were essential to keep the tracks together. Each
mile of rail required between 1,760 and 2,000 sleepers.

Since the 1860s, the railway network has expanded rapidly. By 1890, some 25,500 km of tracks
have been placed. In 1946, the duration of the tracks had increased to more than 765,000 km. As
the railroad tracks extend across India, a growing number of trees were felled. As at the
beginning of the 1850s, only in the Madras presidency, 35,000 trees were cut annually for
sleepers. The government gave contracts to persons to supply the required amounts. These
contractors began cutting trees indiscriminately. Forests around railway tracks quickly
disappeared.

Plantations

Large areas of natural forests were also approved to make way for plantations of tea, coffee and
rubber to meet the growing need of Europe for these products. The colonial government took
over the forests and gave vast areas to European planters at economic prices. These areas were
closed and cleared of forests, and planted with tea or coffee.

THE RISE OF COMMERCIAL FORESTRY

In the previous section, we have seen that the British needed forests to build ships and railways.
The British were worried that the use of forests by the local population and the reckless cutting
of trees by merchants would destroy the forests. Then they decided to invite a German expert,
Dietrich Brandis, for advice, and made him the first inspector General of Forests in India.

8
Brandis realized that a suitable system had to be introduced to administer forests and people
should be trained in conservation science. This system would need a legal sanction. Rules on
using the forest resources had to be framed. Deforestation and grazing had to be restricted so that
forests can be preserved for timber production. Anyone who cut trees without following the
system had to be punished. Then Brandis created the Indian Forest Service in 1864 and helped to
formulate the Indian Forests Act of 1865. The Imperial Forest Research Institute was established
in Dehradun in 1906. The system they teach here was called "scientific forestry." Many people
now, including environmentalists and ecologists, feel that this system is not scientific at all.

In scientific forestry, natural forests that had many different types of trees were cut down.
Instead, a type of tree was planted in straight rows. This is called a plantation. Forest officials
studied the forests, estimated the area under different types of trees and made work plans for
forest management. They planned the amount of plantation area to cut each year. The cut of the
area was then re-planted so that it was ready to be cut again in a few years.

After the adoption of the Forest Act in 1865, it was amended twice, once in 1878 and again in
1927. The 1878 Act divided forests into three categories: Reserved, Protected and Village
Forests. The best forests were called "reserved forests". The villagers could not take anything
from these forests, even for their own use. For the construction of houses or fuel, they could take
wood from protected forests or village.

How were the Lives of the People Affected?

Foresters and villagers had very different ideas about what a good forest would look like. The
villagers wanted forests with a mixture of species to satisfy different needs - fuel, forage, leaves.
On the other hand, the Forestry Department wanted trees that were suitable for ships or railways.
They needed trees that could provide hardwood, and were tall and straight. Special species such
as teak and Sal have been promoted and others have been cut.

In forest areas, people use forest products - roots, leaves, fruits and tubers - for many things.
Fruits and tubers are nourishing, especially during monsoons before harvest. Herbs are used for
medicine, wood for agricultural tools such as yokes and ploughs; bamboo makes excellent fences
and is also used to make baskets and umbrellas. A dried hollow gourd can be used as a portable
water bottle. Almost everything is available in the forest - the leaves can be sewn together to

9
make disposable plates and cups, the Siadi vine (Bauhinia Vahlii) can be used to make ropes and
the spiny bark of the seed (silk-cotton) grate the vegetables. The oil for cooking and lighting the
lamps can be pressed from the fruit of the Mahua.

The Forest Act meant serious difficulties for villagers across the country. After the law, all their
daily practices - cutting wood for their homes, grazing their cattle, harvesting fruit and roots,
hunting and fishing - have become illegal. People were now forced to steal wood from the forests
and, if caught, they were at the mercy of the forest rangers who took bribes from them. The
women who collected firewood were particularly worried. It was also common for police officers
and rangers to harass people by asking them for free food.

How did Forest Rules Affect Cultivation?

One of the main impacts of European colonialism was the practice of Shifting Cultivation or
Swidden Agriculture. This is a traditional agricultural practice in many parts of Asia, Africa and
South America. It has many local names, such as Boats in Southeast Asia, milpa in Central
America, Chitemene or Tavy in Africa, and Chena in Sri Lanka. In India, Dhya, Penda, Bewar,
Nevad, Jhum, Podu, Khandad and Kumri are some of the local terms for Swidden Agriculture.

In the migratory cultivation, parts of the forest are cut and burned in rotation. The seeds are sown
in the ashes after the first monsoon rains, and the harvest is harvested between October and
November. Such plots are cultivated for a couple of years and then left fallow for 12 to 18 years
for the forest to grow again. In these plots a crop mix is grown.

European foresters considered this practice to be harmful to the forests. They felt that land was
used for cultivation every few years could not grow trees for railway timber. When a forest was
burnt, there was the added danger of the flames spreading and burning valuable timber. Shifting
cultivation also made it harder for the government to calculate taxes. Therefore, the government
decided to ban shifting cultivation. As a result, many communities were forcibly displaced from
their homes in the forests. Some had to change occupations, while some resisted through large
and small rebellions.

Who Could Hunt?

10
New forest laws changed the lives of forest dwellers differently. Before forest laws, many people
living in nearby or nearby forests had survived by hunting for deer, partridges and a variety of
small animals. This customary practice was forbidden by forestry laws. Those who were
captured were punished for poaching.

While forest laws deprived people of their customary rights to hunt, hunting the big game
became a sport. In India, hunting tigers and other animals had been part of court culture and
nobility for centuries. Many Mughal paintings show princes and emperors enjoying a hunt. But
under colonial rule, the scale of the hunt increased to such an extent that several species became
extinct almost completely. The British saw the great animals as signs of a savage, primitive and
savage society. They believed that by killing dangerous animals, the British would civilize India.
They gave rewards for the killing of tigers, wolves and other large animals, arguing that they
posed a threat to growers. More than 80,000 tigers, 150,000 leopards and 200,000 wolves were
killed for reward in the period 1875-1925. Little by little, the tiger came to be seen as a sports
trophy. The Maharaja of Sarguja fired 1,157 tigers and 2,000 leopards until 1957. A British
administrator, George Yule, killed 400 tigers. Initially, certain areas of forest were reserved for
hunting. Only much later, ecologists and conservatives began to argue that all these species of
animals needed to be protected and not be killed.

New Trades, New Employments and New Services

While people lost in many ways after the forest department took control of the forests, some
people benefited from the new opportunities that had opened up in the trade. Many communities
abandoned their traditional occupations and began trading in forest products. This happened not
only in India but throughout the world. For example, with the growing demand for rubber in the
mid-nineteenth century, the Mundurucu peoples of the Brazilian Amazon who lived in upland
villages and cultivated manioc, began collecting latex from wild rubber trees to supply traders.
Gradually, they descended to live in commercial positions and became completely dependent on
merchants.

In India, trade in forest products was not new. From medieval times we have records of Adivasi
communities trading with elephants and other goods such as leather, horns, silk cocoons, ivory,
bamboo, spices, fibers, herbs, gums and resins through nomadic communities such as Banjaras

11
With the arrival of the British, however, trade was completely regulated by the government. The
British government gave many large European trading companies the only right to trade in the
forest products from particular areas. Grazing and hunting by the local population were
restricted. In the process, many shepherds and nomads communities such as the Korava, Karacha
and Yerukula of Madras lost their means of life. Some of them began to be called "Criminal
tribes," and were forced to work in factories, mines and plantations under the supervision of the
government.

New job opportunities did not always mean better well-being for people. In Assam, men and
women from forest communities such as Santhals and Oraons of Jharkhand and Gonds of
Chhattisgarh were recruited to work on tea plantations. Their salaries were low and the working
conditions were very bad. They could not easily return to their home villages from where they
had been recruited.

REBELLION IN THE FOREST

In many parts of India and around the world, forest communities rebelled against the changes
that were imposed on them. The leaders of these movements against the British like Siddhu and
Kanu in the Santhal Parganas, Birsa Munda of Chhotanagpur or Alluri Sitarama Raju of Andhra
Pradesh are still remembered today in songs and stories. We will now discuss in detail one of
those rebellions that took place in the Kingdom of Bastar in 1910.

The People of Bastar

Bastar is located in the southernmost part of Chhattisgarh and borders on Andhra Pradesh, Orissa
and Maharashtra. The central part of Bastar is on a plateau. To the north of this plateau is the
plain of Chhattisgarh and to the south is the plain of Godavari. The Indrawati River meanders
through Bastar from east to west. Several different communities live in Bastar, such as Maria and
Muria Gonds, Dhurwas, Bhatras and Halbas. They speak different languages but share common
customs and beliefs. The people of Bastar believe that the Earth gave each people their land and,
in return, they care for the earth making offerings at every agricultural festival. In addition to the
Earth, they show respect for the spirits of the river, the forest and the mountain. As each village
knows where its boundaries lie, local people take care of all natural resources within that

12
boundary. If the people of a village want to get wood from the forests of another village, they
pay a small fee called devsari, dand or man in return. Some villages also protect their forests by
attracting vigilantes and each family contributes a grain to pay them. Every year there is a large
hunt where village leaders in a village (village group) meet and discuss issues of concern,
including forests.

The Fears of the People

When the colonial government proposed to reserve two-thirds of the forest in 1905, and to stop
shifting cultivation, hunting, and harvesting of forest products, the people of Bastar were very
concerned. Some villages were allowed to remain in the reserved forests on the condition that
they worked for the forest department free of cutting and transporting trees and protecting the
forest from fires. Subsequently, these became known as "forest peoples". People from other
villages were displaced without prior notice or compensation. For a long time the villagers had
suffered increased land rents and frequent demands for work and free goods by colonial officials.
Then came the terrible famines, in 1899-1900 and again in 1907-1908. Reservations proved to be
the last straw.

People began to meet and discuss these issues in the councils of their villages, in the bazaars and
in the festivals or where the heads and priests of several villages were gathered. The initiative
was taken by the Dhurwas of Kanger forest, where the reserve was first made. Although there
was not a single leader, many people talk about Gunda Dhur, from the village of Nethanar, as an
important figure in the movement. In 1910, the mango branches, a piece of land, chilies and
arrows, began to circulate between villages. These were actually messages inviting the villagers
to rebel against the British. Each people contributed something to the expenses of rebellion. The
bazaars were looted, the houses of officers and merchants, schools and police stations were
burned and stolen, and the grains were redistributed. Most of the attackers were somehow
associated with the colonial state and its oppressive laws. William Ward, a missionary who
observed the events, wrote: "From all directions came running to Jagdalpur, the police, the
merchants, the forest peons, the teachers and the immigrants."

The British sent troops to repress the rebellion. The Adivasi leaders tried to negotiate, but the
British surrounded their camps and fired on them. After that, they marched through the villages

13
whipping and punishing those who had participated in the rebellion. Most of the villages were
deserted as people fled into the jungles. It took three months (February - May) for the British to
regain control. However, they never managed to capture Gunda Dhur. In a major victory for the
rebels, reserve work was temporarily suspended and the reserved area was reduced to about half
of what was planned before 1910.

The history of the woods and the people of Bastar do not end there. After Independence, it
continued the same practice of keeping people out of the woods and reserving them for industrial
use. In the 1970s, the World Bank proposed that 4,600 hectares of natural salt forest should be
replaced by tropical pine to provide pulp for the paper industry. Only after protests from local
environmentalists did the project halt.

SOME OF THE IMPORTANT ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES\

THE SHORE NUISANCES (BOMBAY AND KOLABA) ACT, 1853

This act is related to the removal of any obstruction, impediment, or public nuisance affecting, or
likely to affect the navigation of the port of Bombay. This act wants to facilitate the removal of
nuisances and encroachments below high-water mark the Islands of Bombay and Kolaba.

Preamble

“WHEREAS there is a large sea-shore in the islands of Bombay and Kolaba, and it is expedient,
with a view to the safe navigation of the harbour of Bombay, and to the public interests
generally, to facilitate the removal of nuisances, obstructions and encroachments below high-
water mark in the said harbour or upon or about the shores of the said islands.”2

1. Power to give notice to remove Nuisance

It is lawful for the Collector of Land-revenue at Bombay to give notice regarding the removal of
any Pollution or Nuisance anywhere below high-water mark in the said harbour of Bombay, or
about the shores of said Islands.

2
http://www.theindianlawyer.in/statutesnbareacts/acts/s23.html

14
These kinds of notices are given by affixing the problem in a public place or near to place where
the Nuisance or Pollution was complained. If no change was brought up then action will taken

2. Petition by person denying right to remove Nuisance

If a person denies to obey the notice given by the Collector, then he/she will be given a month of
time to present in front of Supreme Court of Judicature at Bombay and prove himself with
specified grounds and pray that the said Collector may be restrained from causing such
abatement or removal.

The Court then fixes certain time to hear the adjudication of the petitioner, then based on the
sufficient information provided, the petitioner either has a chance for restraining the alleged
nuisance from being extended, or he is abated or removed by the said Collector. It is completely
based on the Adjudication by the Petitioner.

3. Onus of proving right

The Onus of proving right is completely based on proving in Adjudication by the petitioner

4. Limitation of time of petition

No person shall be given a chance to present his adjudication once he crosses his time of one
month. He shall be given a second chance based on the reason provided for the delay and the
Court’s acceptance.

5. When Collector may cause removal of Nuisance

If either the court quashes the Adjudication provided by the petitioner or the person is unable to
provide an explanation within one month without any awareness. Then, the Collector has the
right to take action against the place of Nuisance by abating or removing.

6. Power to sell materials of encroachment

15
The Collector has a right to sell the materials of any encroachment or obstruction removed under
this Act, and may apply the proceedings of sale in or towards payment of the expenses of the
removal, and, if any surplus shall remain, the same shall be forfeited and be paid and applied.3

7. Saving of rights of Government

Nothing in this act shall prejudice or affect the rights of the Government 4 in any part of the
Harbour or the sea shores with any such proceedings, civil or criminal for abating such nuisances
and encroachments as a foresaid, as might have been had if this Act had not been passed.

8. High-water mark defined

The word, “High-water mark” in this Act shall mean the ordinary line of high-water at monsoon
tides.

SUMMARY

This act was enacted on 15th July, 1853, the purpose for which the act is brought into force, is to
provide for the removal for Nuisance and encroachments which were below the High-water
mark, in the islands of Bombay and Kolaba. This is act was accordingly to the wish of general
public on the reason of achieving a safe navigation. This act is one of the earliest laws
concerning with Water Pollution.

THE INDIAN FISHERIES ACT, 1897

According to the Indian Fisheries Act of 1897, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject
or context-

(1) "Fish" includes shell-fish:

(2) "Fixed engine" means any net, cage, trap or other contrivance for taking fish, fixed in the soil
or made stationary in any other way: and
3
 Short title given by the Bombay Short Titles Act, 1921 (Bom. Act 2 of 1921 ). This Act, so far it relates to the
removal of any obstruction, impediment or public nuisance affecting, or likely to affect the navigation of the port
of Bombay, rep. by Act 22 of 1855, s. 2.

4
Subs. by the A. O. 1937, for" Bombay Govt. Gazette .

16
(3) "Private water" means water which is the exclusive property of any person or in which any
person has for the time being an exclusive right of fishery whether as owner, lessee or in any
other capacity.

Explanation.-Water shall not cease to be "private water" within the meaning of this definition by
reason only that other persons may have by custom a right of fishery therein.5

Destruction of Fish by explosive in Inland waters and on Coasts

If a person uses any destructive force with an intention to cause damage to fishes in order by
killing them, the he or she shall be subjected to an imprisonment of two months or he or she must
pay a fine or Rupees Two Hundred.

The word “water” includes the sea within a distance of one marine league of the sea-coast and if
a person commits an objection to such sea may be tried, punished and in all respects dealt with as
if it had been committed on the land abutting on such coast.6

Destruction of Fish by poisoning water

(1) If any person places any poison, lime or harmful material in any water with in order to catch
or destroy any fish, he shall be punished with imprisonment for a period that may be extended to
two months, or a fine. It can be extended to two hundred rupees.

(2) The Government of the State may, by notification in the Official Gazette, suspend the
operation of this section in any specified area, and may similarly modify or cancel such
notification.

Protection of Fish in selected water by rules of state government

(1) The Government of the State may establish rules for the purposes detailed below in this
section, and by notification in the Official Gazette shall apply all or some of said rules to said
waters, without being private water, such as the Government of the State. State may specify in
said notice.

5
http://nbaindia.org/uploaded/Biodiversityindia/1.%20Fisheries%20Act.pdf
6
Sub Sect (1) of Indian Fisheries Act, 1897

17
(2) The Government of the State may also, by means of a similar notification, apply such rules or
any of them to any private water with the written consent of the owner of the same and of all
persons who have for the moment any exclusive rights of fish in it

(3) Such rules may prohibit or regulate all or some of the following matters, namely: -

(a) The construction and use of fixed engines;

(b) The construction of dams; and

(c) The size and type of networks to be used and the ways of using them.

(4) Such rules may also prohibit any fishing in any specified water for a period not exceeding
two years.

(5) In making any rule under this section, the State Government may

(a) Direct that a violation thereof shall be punishable by a fine that may be one hundred rupees
and, where the offense is a continuous infringement, with a fine which may be extended to ten
rupees for each day after the date of the first conviction during which it is found to have
persisted; and

(b) Provide- (i) Seizure, forfeit and removal of fixed, erected or used engines, or used nets, in
contravention of the rule, and (ii) Loss of any fish taken by any such arrangement motor or
network

(6) The power to make the rules under this section is subject to the condition that they will be
made after the previous publication.

Arrest without warrant for offenses under this act

(1) Any police officer, or any other person specially authorized by the State Government in this
name, either by name or by holding a position, for the time being, may, without an order of a
Magistrate and without a warrant, detain any person who commits in their opinion any violation
of criminal law punishable under section 4 or 5 or under any rule under section 6-

(a) If the name and address of the person are unknown to him, and

18
(b) If the person refuses to give his name and address or if there is reason to doubt the accuracy
of the name and address if given.

(2) A person arrested under this section may be detained until their name and address have been
verified correctly: provided that no detained person is detained longer than necessary shall be
brought before a Magistrate, except under the order of a Magistrate for his detention.7

INDIAN FOREST ACT, 1927

The Indian Forests Act, 1927, relied heavily on previous Indian forestry acts implemented under
the British. The most famous was the Indian Forest Act of 1878. Both the 1878 Act and the 1927
Act sought to consolidate and reserve areas with significant forest cover or wildlife to regulate
the movement and transit of forest products and duties applicable to wood and other forest
products. It also defines the procedure to be followed to declare that an area is a reserved forest,
protected forest or village forest. It defines what is a forest crime, what are the prohibited acts
within a Reserved Forest and the penalties that apply to the violation of the provisions of the
Law.

The Indian Forest Law of 1865 extended the British colonial claims on forests in India. The 1865
Act was a forerunner of the Forestry Act of 1878, which truncated the traditional centennial use
of forest communities and secured control of colonial governments over forestry. The act of
1865 empowered the British government to declare any land covered with trees as a government
forest and to establish rules for managing it.

According to the Forestry Law of 1878, three types of forests were designated; Reserved,
protected and village. Reserved forests were considered the most commercially valuable and
susceptible to sustained exploitation. General control over the status of reserved forests was
sought, which involved the waiver or transfer of other claims and rights, although limited access
was occasionally granted. Legally, there were channels to challenge the forest reserve, although
rural communities had little experience with legal procedures, and illiterate villagers often
ignored that a survey and demarcation was in process. Protected forests were also controlled by
the state, but some concessions were granted, conditional upon the reservation of commercial

7
http://nbaindia.org/uploaded/Biodiversityindia/1.%20Fisheries%20Act.pdf

19
tree species, when they became valuable. Protected forests could also be closed to the collection
and grazing of firewood, wherever considered necessary. As the demand for timber for the
empire increased, it was found that the limited control the state had granted was inadequate; so
many protected forests were designated as reserved forests.

The colonial approach to forestry was strengthened in 1894, following the advice of the German
farmer Voelcker, who emphasized the importance of good forest cover to avoid environmental
degradation that could otherwise affect taxable agricultural production. The legislation generated
from this council became known as the Voelcker Resolution, and followed previous designations
for forests; Reserved, protected, village, plus other, private. The main production of wood was
commercial timber production, but some concessions to the ecological function of forests were
also tacitly acknowledged. Consequently, this act served as a model for forest policies in other
colonies.8

CONDITIONS OF VARIOUS GROUPS OF PEOPLE AFTER THE CHANGES IN

FOREST MANAGEMENT

SHIFTING CULTIVATORS

European foresters considered that shifting cultivation was detrimental to forests. The
government banned shifting cultivation. Displaced farmers were forcibly displaced from their
homes in the forests. Some had to change occupations, while some resisted through large and
small rebellions.

NOMADIC AND PASTORALIST COMMUNTIES

Forest laws deprived people of their customary rights and meant severe hardship for nomads and
shepherds. They could cut wood for their homes, they could shepherd their fruits and roots
harvested. Hunting and fishing became illegal. They were forced to steal wood. If they had been
captured, they would be at the mercy of the forest guards and would have to offer bribes to the
guards. Many pastoral and nomadic communities such as the Korava, Karacha of the Madras
Presidency lost their livelihoods. Some of the communities of nomadic tribes began to be called
criminal tribes and were forced to work in factories, mines and plantations under government

8
http://www.ganesha.co.uk/JoPubWeb/colonialism2.html

20
supervision. They were also recruited to work on plantations. Their salaries were low and the
conditions of work very bad.

FIRMS TRADING IN TIMBER AND FOREST PRODUCE

In the early 19th century, oak forests in England were disappearing. This created a supply
problem for the Royal Navy. In the 1820s, search groups were sent to explore forest resources in
India. The trees were felled on a large scale and exported large quantities of timber from India.
The colonial government took over the forests and gave vast areas to European planters at
economic prices. The British government granted many large European trading companies the
sole right to trade forest products from particular areas. The government awarded contracts to
contractors who cut trees indiscriminately and made huge profits.

PLANTATION OWNERS

Large areas of natural forests were also cleared to make way for tea, coffee and rubber
plantations to meet Europe’s growing need for these commodities. The colonial government took
over the forests, and gave vast areas to European planters at cheap rates. These areas were
enclosed and cleared of forests and planted with tea or coffee. Communities like Santhals from
Assam, and Oraons from Jharkhand and Gonds from Chhattisgarh were recruited to work on tea
plantations. Their wages were low and conditions of work very bad. The plantation owners,
under the protection and rights given by the British Government, made huge profits.

CONCLUSSION

“During the pre-colonial period, forests in Madras Presidency were controlled both privately and
by the rulers. Similarly, in the hills, the tribals controlled the forests privately. The rulers of the
plains had never attempted to encroach upon the tribal private forests during the pre-colonial
period. After colonial intervention, the British government adopted different methods to
encroach upon private forests with the sole intention of extracting revenue. To ensure their
control over the forests, the colonial administration had trampled upon the traditional rights over
forests, and other common property rights. The legitimacy of these age-old rights was questioned
and, ironically, evidence was sought to prove them. How could the unlettered tribals be expected
to possess written documents? Colonial intrusion into tribal areas was accompanied by the

21
imposition of several restrictions which were in utter disregard of the inconveniences and
difficulties they posed to the hill inhabitants. It was mere aggrandizement, and in the process
both common property and occupational rights were usurped, and traditional rights ignored. The
main aim of the colonial government was neither the protection of forests from illicit felling by
greedy contractors, nor protection of the tribals from exploitation at the hands of these
contractors. Direct control of the forests and forest resources was only to extract more revenue.
This being its prime concern, the colonial government tried to bring the tribal private forests
under its ambit through every conceivable irregularity. The hill chieftains were detained in
custody, their legitimate claims were disregarded, and divisions created between them.
Ultimately the tribal private forests were brought under the total control of the government
through leases. But when the expected revenue was not realized, the forests were returned to the
Jagirdars. In short, the British administration intruded into tribal areas to control forest resources
mainly for commercial purposes and not to protect them from the contractors”.

22