FOREST RIGHTS

• 39 areas were declared by UNESCO in 2012 as being critical for biodiversity in the Western Ghats, out of 10 are in Karnataka.
• Before recognising areas as world heritage sites, UNESCO seeks the opinion of the inhabitants on the implication of the possible declaration on their lives & livelihoods.
• The primary stakeholders were Scheduled Tribes (STs), other dwellers include Scheduled Caste (SC), Backward Classes, minorities & the general category.

• The majority of the forest dwellers claimed land measuring not more than one acre.
• It is clear that the claims were nowhere closer to the ceiling of four hectares permitted under the Forest Rights Act (FRA).
• The rejection rate of the other traditional forest dwellers was two times more than the STs.
• The wastelands & forest lands which have not been notified as protected forests or reserved forests are known as Revenue lands or Paisari Bhoomis.
• In the case of the STs, the reasons were attributed to fresh encroachments, the claimants not living on the lands claimed, and claimed lands being called revenue lands.
• In the case of other traditional forest dwellers, it was mainly failure to produce evidence of dependency & dwelling on forest land for 75 years.
• The FRA is a good law which recognizes the rights of the STs because of their overall backwardness.
• Many people felt that there should be a closure to this act & the process cannot go on forever with new claims emerging on regular basis.
• Presenting the declaration of the world heritage site in a positive light, they said that illegal tree-felling & poaching have come down following the stringent implementation of rules in protected areas.
• The people in the villages falling under eco-sensitive zones said they had started experiencing severe restrictions on their entry into forests.
• Development activities like road repair were stopped.
• Farming is not allowed in a normal way, a slight sound demurs, and the use of fertilizers is not allowed to be carried into the forest.
• The people are prohibited from cutting trees falling on their houses to undertake repair work or move the earth.
• A striking revelation was that these restrictions were in enforcement from the time these areas were declared as protected areas & not necessarily after their declaration as world heritage sites.
• The increasing animal insurgency is causing damage to the crops of the farming forest dwellers.
• Those who don't have recognition over their lands are not given compensation for the loss.
• Monkeys & snakes released from urban settings into the forests enter their houses. The monkeys do not survive in the wild for long.
• Owning livestock in villages close to forests is more challenging than in regular revenue villages.
• In the areas where irrigation projects have come up, the affected people reported that grazing lands were taken over by the government to compensate for the forest land lost to projects.

• The respondents had the lands claimed under the FRA even though their applications were rejected or still pending.
• In many places, they were apprehensive that people were accepting the resettlement packages & moving out of protected areas for good.
• If half the village population moved away, it would become difficult for the remaining ones to live their normal life.
• Most forest dwellers said that they were still deprived of basic facilities & other government benefits extended under various schemes & programmes as they don't possess the 'Records of Rights, Tenancy & Crops'.
• The government must address this issue in consonance with the rules of the Act.
• The issue becomes complicated when the people refuse to 'relocate' on grounds of their attachment to the land fearing extinction of their culture & religious roots.
• The government must bring more clarity to the Act to avoid conflicts between the government agencies conserving biodiversity & people living in the forest for decades & centuries.
• The conservation of biodiversity requires special attention.
• Forest dwellers willing to live in the forest must be allowed to stay.
• Many of them comply with the norms of the eco-sensitive zones because they do not depend on modern development needs like the use of fertilizers & mobile phones.
• In the same breath, those wanting to experience the fruits of development must be relocated as per their choice of new place & suitable package.
• This can be possible only when the areas declared as protected are arrived at after consultations with the local population.
• This did not transparently take place at the time of the declaration of the world heritage site when protected areas were notified.