UNCLASSED FORESTS

2. Unclassed Forests

• Unclassed forests, also known as deemed forests, are areas of land that possess forest-like characteristics but have not been officially classified or notified as protected forest areas.
• These forests may vary in terms of ownership, ranging from government entities such as forest departments or revenue departments to community-owned or privately-owned lands.
• Despite their ecological significance, unclassed forests often lack legal protection, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation and degradation.
• The identification and conservation of unclassed forests have become increasingly important in environmental and conservation efforts.
• Policies and regulations, such as the Forest (Conservation) Act and various state-specific forest policies, aim to address the protection and sustainable management of these forests.
• However, challenges such as incomplete data, lack of verification, and inadequate regulatory oversight pose obstacles to effectively safeguarding unclassed forests and ensuring their long-term ecological integrity.

3. Forest (Conservation) Act Amendment (FCAA) 2023

The Forest (Conservation) Act Amendment (FCAA) 2023 brings significant changes to the legal protection of unclassed forests, as established by the landmark T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad (1996) case. Under this amendment, unclassed forests, also known as deemed forests, face the risk of losing their protection, potentially leading to their diversion for non-forest purposes. The amendment mandates the preparation of State Expert Committee (SEC) reports to identify these forests, which fall outside of notified forest areas.

Key Provisions of the FCAA

• The FCAA broadens the scope of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, to include all categories of forests, regardless of ownership or notification status. This encompasses forests defined by their dictionary meaning, along with unclassed forests.
• With the FCAA in effect, any diversion of unclassed forests for non-forest purposes necessitates approval from the Central government. This measure aims to regulate and oversee the utilization of unclassed forests, ensuring their conservation and sustainable management.
• Unclassed forests may be owned by various entities, including government bodies such as forests, revenue departments, and railways, as well as communities and private individuals. Despite their ownership diversity, unclassed forests share the characteristic of not being officially notified as protected forest areas.

4. Identification Status of Unclassed Forests

The identification of unclassed forests, mandated by the Forest (Conservation) Act Amendment (FCAA) 2023, has been a subject of uncertainty and scrutiny since the landmark T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad judgment in 1996. Recent developments shed light on the efforts and challenges surrounding this crucial task.

Challenges in Identification Process

• Despite assertions by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) to a Joint Parliamentary Committee that State Expert Committees (SECs) had identified unclassed forests, the actual status remained ambiguous. An RTI application revealed that the MoEFCC did not possess the required reports, casting doubt on the progress of identification.
• Seven States and Union Territories, including Goa, Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Ladakh, Lakshadweep, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal, reportedly did not establish SECs. This lack of institutional framework hindered the identification process in these regions.
• Many States cited the short duration provided by the Supreme Court and the voluminous nature of the task as reasons for their inability to conduct physical surveys and demarcate unclassed forest lands within the stipulated time frame.

Developments in Identification Efforts

• The MoEFCC has recently uploaded SEC reports on its website, offering transparency regarding the progress of identification efforts across states.
• However, the uploaded reports paint a concerning picture, as many states have not provided verifiable data on the identification, status, and location of unclassed forests. Only 17 out of 23 states have submitted reports aligned with the directives of the Court.

5. Analysis and Concerns of SEC Reports

The State Expert Committee (SEC) reports, aimed at identifying unclassed forests as per the Forest (Conservation) Act Amendment (FCAA) 2023, reveal several critical insights and challenges

Reported Findings

• Only nine States have provided information on the extent of unclassed forests, while most states and Union Territories (UTs) have focused on detailing various types of forest areas under government ownership.
• The majority of States and UTs have not specified the geographic locations of forests in their reports. Any geographical information provided pertains mainly to reserve or protected forests, which is redundant as it is already available with Forest Departments.
• SEC reports question the accuracy of forest area assessments by the Forest Survey of India. For instance, Gujarat's SEC report indicates unclassed forests covering 192.24 sq. km, contrasting sharply with the Forest Survey's estimate of 4,577 sq. km (1995-1999). Such discrepancies raise concerns about the reliability of forest area data.

Challenges and Implications

• The treatment of SEC reports without on-ground verification raises concerns about the potential destruction of forests that should have been identified, demarcated, and protected nearly three decades ago. The absence of baseline data from 1996-1997 further complicates efforts to assess the extent of forest loss over time.
• Instances such as Kerala's SEC report omitting ecologically fragile areas like the Pallivasal unreserve in Munnar highlight the risk of overlooking critical habitats, potentially exacerbating environmental vulnerabilities, as witnessed during events like the devastating 2018 floods.

6. Potential Effects of Forest (Conservation) Act Amendment (FCAA)

The enactment of the Forest (Conservation) Act Amendment (FCAA) is likely to have significant repercussions on India's forests and ecological landscape.

• The potential loss of unclassed forests, as highlighted by the SEC reports, is a matter of concern across all States. This loss could lead to adverse ecological consequences, including habitat destruction, loss of biodiversity, and disruption of ecosystem services.
• The hurried compilation of SEC reports using incomplete and unverified data suggests a lack of thoroughness in the identification process. This raises questions about the reliability and accuracy of the information presented to the Supreme Court.
• The failure to fully implement the directives of the T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad judgment represents a missed opportunity to align with the Indian Forest Policy's goals of achieving specific forest cover targets. This failure undermines the conservation and sustainable management of India's forest resources.
• The promulgation of the FCAA without adequate examination of the SEC reports reflects a lack of diligence on the part of the Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change (MoEFCC). This oversight could have serious implications for India's ecosystems and ecological security.

Call for Accountability and Remedial Action

• Those responsible for the oversight and implementation of forest conservation measures, including the preparation of SEC reports, need to be held accountable for any shortcomings or negligence in fulfilling their obligations.
• The national government must take prompt and decisive action to address the deficiencies in the identification, retrieval, and protection of forest areas, as mandated by the 1996 Supreme Court judgment. This may involve revisiting the identification process, enhancing data collection methods, and strengthening conservation efforts to safeguard India's forests for future generations.