Forest Policies And Tribals

Indian Forest Act of 1865

This act was first attempt in the direction of regulation of forest produces by the forest dwellers and asserting the State
monopoly over the forest.
The state was empowered to declare any land covered with tree as forest and to regulate it by notification, provided that
such notification should not abridge or affect any existing rights of individuals or communities.
Thus, socially regulated practices of the forest people were to be restrained by law. So, the customary ‘rights’ of using
forest products were transformed as ‘privileges’.
The Act was applicable only to forests under the control of the Government and no provisions were made to cover private
forestThe Forest Act, 1878

This Act was more comprehensive than the previous and extended state’s authority over the
forests.

This act divided forest into three parts namely reserved forests, protected forests and village
forests.
The Act tightened the government’s control on forest by prohibiting certain activities like
trespassing or pasturing of cattle
But this was not applicable to neighbouring forests where right was still in the hands of communities. Through this
legislation, by one stroke of the executive pen, obliterate centuries of customary use of the forest by rural populations all
over India.
Thus, when the Colonial State asserted control over woodlands, which had earlier been in the hands of local
communities and provided to work these forests for commercial timber production, it intervened in the day to day life
of the Indian villages to an unprecedented degree
Indian Forest Act, 1927

The Indian Forest Act,1927 aimed to regulate the movement of forest produce, and duty leviable forest produce.
It also explains the procedure to be followed for declaring an area as Reserved Forest, Protected Forest or a Village
Forest.
This act has details of what a forest offence is, what are the acts prohibited inside a Reserved Forest, and penalties
leviable on violation of the provisions of the Act

This Act impacted the life of forest-dependent communities. The penalties and procedures given in this Act aimed to
extend the state’s control over forests as well as diminishing the status of people’s rights to forest use.
 The village communities were alienated from their age-old symbiotic association with forests. Further amendments
were also made to restrain the local use of forests mainly by forest- dependent communities.
It was enacted to make forest laws more effective and to improve the previous forest laws.

Objective

• To consolidate all the previous laws regarding forests.

• To give the Government the power to create different classes of forests for their effective
usage for the colonial purpose.

• To regulate movement and transit of forest produce, and duty leviable on timber and other
forest produce.
• To define the procedure to be followed for declaring an area as Reserved Forest, Protected Forest or Village
Forest.
• To define forest offences acts prohibited inside the Reserved Forest, and penalties leviable on the violation.

• To make conservation of forests and wildlife more accountable.

 Types of Forests

Reserved Forests: Reserve forests are the most restricted forests and are constituted by the State Government on any
forest land or wasteland which is the property of the Government.

• In reserved forests, local people are prohibited, unless specifically allowed by a Forest
Officer in the course of the settlement.

Protected Forests: The State Government is empowered to constitute any land other than reserved forests as
protected forests over which the Government has proprietary rights and the power to issue rules regarding the use of
such forests.

• This power has been used to establish State control over trees, whose timber, fruit or
other non-wood products have revenue-raising potential.
• Village forest: Village forests are the one in which the State Government may assign to ‘any village community the
rights of Government to or over any land which has been constituted a reserved forest’.

• Degree of protection

• Reserved forests > Protected forests > Village forests

 Forest Settlement Officer

• The Forest Settlement Officer is appointed, by the State government, to inquire into and determine the existence,
nature and extent of any rights alleged to exist in favour of any person in or over any land comprising a Reserved
forest.
• He/she is empowered even to acquire land over which right is claimed.

Drawbacks

• The government claimed that the act was aimed to protect the vegetation cover of India. However, a deep
investigation of the act reveals that the real motive behind the act was to earn revenue from the cutting of the
trees and from the forest produce.

• The act gave immense discretion and power to the forest bureaucracy which often led
to the harassment of the forest dwellers.

• Moreover, it led to depriving the nomads and tribal people their age-old rights and privileges to use the
forests and forest produce.
• The revenue earning potential from timber overshadowed the other values like
biodiversity, prevention of soil erosion, etc.
National Forest Policy of 1952

The first post independence forest policy was formulated in 1952 with a realisation of

‘maximum annual revenue from the forests’ in the nation making.

This belied all hopes of tribal people by higher regulation on their rights over the forest resources. It followed the lines of
colonial policy makers but it went beyond in infringing on the privileges of the tribals.
The private forests of tribals that were not touched in the old policy were subjected to controls under the new one. Free
grazing was recognised under the old policy but a fee was imposed on it in the new one.

A concession is given relating to shifting cultivation, by the provision that should be curbed not by coercion as earlier
but by persuasion. So the ‘rights’ which were converted to ‘privileges’ in the colonial periods were turned to
‘concession’ in this policy
New policyy withdrew the right over forestland for cultivation which was provided by the colonial predecessor and it also
started controlling the private forests which was totally under the control of the tribal in colonial period.

The old policy didn't touch free grazing in forests. The new policy sought to bring it under control. Fees were introduced
and grazing was to be kept to the minimum.
The forest policy of 1952 of free India was considered worse than its colonial predecessor policy of 1894, particularly for
the indigenous people (Reddy 1995).
o analyse the Forest policy and its impact on the tribal of India, The President of India constituted a commission under the
chairmanship of
U.N. Dhebar.
The Scheduled area and Schedule tribe commission emphasized the importance of forests in the life of the tribal people
in providing them with all kinds of food, wild game and fish, wood for construction of houses and even income from the
sale of forest produce besides fuel and criticised the gradual extension of Government authority over forests to the
detriment of tribal life and economy
The Commission recommended that the policy of 1952 should be reconsidered and tribals should be allowed to cultivate
forest lands
Forest Conservation Act 1980

Forest (Conservation) Act was enacted for providing a higher level of protection
to forests and to regulate the diversion of forest lands for non-forestry
purposes

It was enacted to consolidate the law related to forest, the transit of forest
produces and the duty liveable on timber and other forests produce.

The Act deals with the four categories of forests, namely reserved forests,
village forests, protected forests, and private forests.

It targeted to limit deforestation, conserve biodiversity, and save wildlife.

Though this Act provides greater hope towards forest conservation it was not
 successful in its target.
Feature

1. Section 2 of the act lists four criteria where permission of the Central
Government is required for any action of State regarding –
1. Declaring that any reserved forest ceases to be reserved.
2. Use of forestland for non-forest purposes.
3. Leasing forest to any private person.
4. Declaring that any forest land may be cleared of trees that have grown
naturally in that land, for the purpose of using it for reforestation.

2. Removing self-regenerating forest for the creation of plantation

is also the non-forest purpose.

3. There is also a provision of compensatory afforestation. User agency has to

pay for forestland as if is revenue land. NPV (Net Present Value) has to be paid
for 50 years. NPV is an ecological
Drawbacks of the Forest (Conservation) Act:

cost of forests.
•This Act has just transferred the powers from States to
Centres to decide the conversion of reserve forest lands to non-
forest areas. Thus, powers have been centralized at the top.

•The Act has failed to attract public support because it has

infringed upon the human rights of the poor native people.

•Forest-dwelling tribal communities have rich knowledge about the forest

resources, their values, and conservation. But their role and contribution are
neither acknowledged nor honored.

•Efforts are now being made to make up for gaps in laws by introducing
the principles of Public trust or Human rights protection.
 Forest Rights Act, 2006

Historical Background
• A large number of people especially the scheduled tribes have lived in and around forests for a long
period in symbiotic relationship.
• This relationship has led to formalized or informal customary rules of use and extraction, often
governed by ethical beliefs and practices that have ensured that forests are not too degraded.
• During the colonial time the focus shifted from the forests being used as a resource base for sustenance of
local communities to a State resource for commercial interests and development of land for agriculture.
• Several Acts and policies such as the 3 Indian Forest Acts of 1865, 1894 and 1927 of Central Govt and some
state forest Acts curtailed centuries‐old, customary‐use rights of local communities.
• This continued even after independence till much later until enactment of The Scheduled Tribes and
Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.

Features of the Act

• The act recognize and vest the forest rights and occupation in Forest land in forest Dwelling Scheduled Tribes
(FDST) and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFD)who have been residing in such forests for generations.
• The act also establishes the responsibilities and authority for sustainable use, conservation of biodiversity and
maintenance of ecological balance of FDST and OTFD.

• It strengthens the conservation regime of the forests while ensuring livelihood

and food security of the FDST and OTFD.

• It seeks to rectify colonial injustice to the FDST and OTFD who are integral to the very survival and sustainability
of the forest ecosystem.

The act identify four types of rights

• Title rights
• It gives FDST and OTFD the right to ownership to land farmed by tribals or forest dwellers subject to a
maximum of 4 hectares.
• Ownership is only for land that is actually being cultivated by the concerned family and no new lands will
be granted.

• Use rights
 • The rights of the dwellers extend to extracting Minor Forest Produce, grazing areas, to pastoralist
routes, etc

• Relief and development rights

• To rehabilitation in case of illegal eviction or forced displacement and to basic amenities, subject to
restrictions for forest protection

• Forest management rights

• It includes the right to protect, regenerate or conserve or manage any community forest resource which
they have been traditionally protecting and conserving for sustainable use.

Who can claim these Rights?

• Members or community of the Scheduled Tribes who primarily reside in and who depend on the forests or
forest lands for bona fide livelihood needs.
• It can also be claimed by any member or community who has for at least three generations (75 years) prior to the
13th day of December, 2005 primarily resided in forests land for bona fide livelihood needs.
• The Gram Sabha is the authority to initiate the process for determining the nature and extent of Individual Forest
Rights (IFR) or Community Forest Rights (CFR) or both that may be given to FDST and OTFD.
Procedure

• First, the gram sabha (full village assembly, NOT the gram panchayat) makes a recommendation – i.e who
has been cultivating land for how long, which minor forest produce is collected, etc. The gram sabha plays this
role because it is a public body where all people participate, and hence is fully democratic and transparent.
• The gram sabha’s recommendation goes through two stages of screening committees at
the taluka and district levels.
• The district level committee makes the final decision (see section 6(6)). The Committees
have six members – three government officers and three elected persons.
• At both the taluka and the district levels, any person who believes a claim is false can appeal to the
Committees, and if they prove their case the right is denied (sections 6(2) and 6(4)).
• Finally, land recognised under this Act cannot be sold or transferred.

Importance
• The acts looks to right the wrongs of government policies in both colonial and independent India toward
forest-dwelling communities, whose claims over their resources were taken away during 1850s.
• The act also has potential of sustainably protecting forest through traditional ways along with providing
tribes means of livelihood.
• It expands the mandate of the Fifth and the Sixth Schedules of the Constitution that protect the claims of
indigenous communities over tracts of land or forests they inhabit.

Challenges

• Administrative Apathy
• Implementation of the act remains the biggest challenge as acts related to the environment are not entirely
compliant with the law, illegal encroachments have happened as much as that claims have been unfairly
rejected.
• As tribals are not a big vote bank in most states, governments find it convenient to subvert FRA or
not bother about it at all in favour of monetary gains.

• Lack of Awareness
• Unawareness at the Lower level of forest officials who are supposed to help process forest rights claims is
high and majority of the aggrieved population too remains in the dark regarding their rights.
• The forest bureaucracy has misinterpreted the FRA as an instrument to regularise encroachment instead of a
welfare measure for tribals.
• Dilution of Act
• Certain sections of environmentalist raise the concern that FRA bend more in the favour of individual rights,
giving lesser scope for community rights.
• Community Rights effectively gives the local people the control over forest resources which remains a
significant portion of forest revenue making states wary of vesting forest rights to Gram Sabha.

• Reluctance of the forest bureaucracy to give up control

• There has been deliberate sabotage by the forest bureaucracy, both at the Centre and the states, and to
some extent by big corporates.
• The forest bureaucracy fears that it will lose the enormous power over land and people that it currently
enjoys, while the corporates fear they may lose the cheap access to valuable natural resources.

• Institutional Roadblock
• Rough maps of community and individual claims are prepared by Gram Sabha which at times often lack
technical knowhow and suffers from educational incapacity.
• Intensive process of documenting communities’ claims under the FRA makes the process both cumbersome
and harrowing for illiterate tribals.
 The alienation of tribes was one of the factors behind the Naxal movement, which affects states like Chhattisgarh,
Odisha and Jharkhand. The act through identifying IFR and CFR tries to provide inclusion to tribes.
• It has the potential to democratise forest governance by recognising community forest resource rights over an
estimated 85.6 million acres, thereby empowering over 200 million forest dwellers in over 1,70,000 villages.
• The act will ensure that people get to manage their forest on their own which will regulate exploitation of forest
resources by officials, forest governance and management as well as tribal rights etc.