1

Indian Forest and Wildlife Administration, A Critique

Nature provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed Mahatma Gandhi

Contents

P.no

1.)Introduction2.)Forest Protection-

4 5 5 6 9 10 10 13 15 16 16 17 18 19 20

3.)Forest Administration in India-

4.)Acts and Administration Structure today- -

5.)Administrative Structure of the Forest Department 6.)Wild life conservation7.)Wildlife Administration- -

8).Administartive Difficulties and solutions-

9)Judicial View of Forest & Wild life Administartion 10) Flaws & Loop holes in forest acts & administration11.)Government role in Administring laws Effectively12.)Findings- 13.)Conclusion14)Table of Cases15.)Bibilography -

Summary:Research Methodology Aims and Objectives: This paper is aimed at studying the various laws, policies and action plans enacted by the state in order to protect forests and wildlife and the manner in which these are administered. The Primary object has been to focus on the manner in which the administration has been envisaged by the state, the impediments this poses to the protection of the forests and the wildlife, and the manner in which the Indian bureaucracy has dealt and failed with the same. Camparing with international scenario. Method of Analysis: I had begun with a historical analysis of the manner in which forest and wildlife administration has begun. I have looked at the two fields separately, in order to see the different developments in the two fields although there are various similarities, which have been highlighted. I have attempted to understand the various difficulties faced in the course of this administration through both the theoretical perspective and through fieldwork. Critisicim on U.N.O and their implimentations. Lastly i have attempted to analyse the methods which are working towards saving the forests and wildlife and has suggested solutions to the administrative problems where possible. Scope of the Project:This project does not purport to be a comprehensive study on all the laws and policies relating to forest and wildlife; it merely tries to enumerate the trend of the administration over the years, the flaws in the same and the manner in which some have been rectified. It has also examined the areas in which the administrative efficiency has actually regressed. Discussed breifely about U.N.O negligence on world life protection across the globe. However, I was unable to actually visit any of the protected areas, due to the short duration of the assignment. In addition, the researcher has looked at only limited case law to examine the judiciarys opinion of the administration. How the tribals effected by administration of Forests acts. Chapterisation: This paper has been divided into sections to maintain continuity. The first section gives an introduction to the nature of forests and wildlife and why they need to be protected. The second section deals with the various policies and laws important to the administration of forests. It also deals with the manner in which the officials have actually changed the manner of management progressively. The third section deals with the administration under the Wildlife Acts, policies and plans. The fourth section deals with the various problems faced by the administration, both in theory and practice, and offers some solutions after identifying the best practices.

The world is home to very diverse and rich wildlife which includes over infinite number of species. Forests are very valuable gift of nature, which have moderating effect on climate/ environment. Wild life is a Part and Parcel of Environment, i.e forests which constitutes wealth of the nation. Painfully, it also includes N number of endangerd species. A great deal has been made in the last sixty years to preserve the nature habitats as well as the population of the wild life across the world land scape. Protection and conservation of forests and wildlife are essential to maintain the earths health and environment. The earth is the only known living planet and it is because of its special environment and ecology which are life-supporting. Forests are part and parcel of our environment. They are one of the most valuable resources and gifts of nature. They play a key role in the maintenance climate, rain-patterns, water conservation,soil conservation. They are the natural home of much type of animals, birds, reptiles, insects etc. They supply timber, fuel, medicines, and wood for peeper-pulp and raw materials for many industries. The increasing depletion and destruction of wildlife is a source of great concern. One out of every seven persons of the world live in India.

1. Introduction:Although India had been known for its biodiversity, it is lamentable that in the name of technological advances and economic gain, along with the callous attitude of the population and the administration towards the forests, there has been an irreversible depletion in the natural resources. In fact businessmen who have merely commercial interest in the forests exploit the same unscrupulously with the help of those very administrators and legislators who have a duty under the Constitution to protect the few ecological refuges remaining. The state of the environment is rapidly becoming an important topic of debate in intellectual and political circles as more people realise the importance and finite nature of these resources which play an important in preserving the ecological balance necessary for survival of life on the planet.This can be seen in light of the apparently conflicting aims of development and environmental sustenance. The loss of forest cover and the knowledge that the country has barely 19% forest cover, has given rise to concerns among various segments of society. In contemporary times, Wildlife has acquired a separate and important status of its own, independent of the Forests, as was recognised for the first time in the 1952 Forest Policy and finally in the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.There are various efforts being made to conserve the same with various national parks and sanctuaries being set aside to protect the wildlife. However, there are still great problems with the administration due to the continuing poaching problems and interference from bureaucrats and unclear objectives. In fact in light of the conflicts in the objects of the forest and wildlife departments and their mandates, the administration of the entire ecosystem becomes a difficult task. Thankfully there has been much debate about this and there has been a move to recently make the administration more human friendly, giving importance to the locals and their traditional style of living. In addition there have been moves to bring all the environmental concerns under a wide umbrella Act which will

permit a harmonisation of the various claims and this is extremely important to ensure that there is actual protection of the forests and the wildlife, which India is known for.
1

2. Forest Protection:Forest has been of great importance to mankind since prehistoric days. 60% of the earth once covered with forest. With the development of civilization, large areas have been cleared to make way for farms, mines, towns and roads. Today about 30% of earth is still forested.1. Forest protection is a general term describing methods purported to preserve or improve a forest threatened or affected by abuse. The types of abuse that forest protection seeks to prevent include:

Aggressive or unsustainable farming and logging Expanding city development caused by population explosion and the resulting urban sprawl

There is considerable debate over the effectiveness of forest protection methods. Enforcement of laws regarding protection of forest land is weak or non-existent in most parts of the world.2

3. FOREST ADMINISTRATION in India:History of the forest acts:The Forests were brought into the realm of legislative control with the advent of the British rule. The Forest Department was formed in 1864, which was followed by the Forest Act, 1865.The department administered forests on a small scale and a real administrative structure came into effect however, only with the enactment of the Forest Act, 1878, when the British realised the importance of the Indian forests as a permanent source of revenue.3 The Act sought to establish the claims of the state to forest land. The British claimed that land which was strategic for their commercial interests, but left to the tribals those lands which were not so important. Thus the distinction between the various types of forests which still subsists, finds its origins here. The British set up a complex administrative structure and systematically protected all forests for timber.4 The Forest Policy 1894, in its goals moved away from this and gave more importance to public benefit and agricultural use; hence the policy divided the forests into various categories.
1

Chris Blair, Seeing the People for the Trees: Implications of Social Forestry for the Training of Forestry Extension 2. Forest protection Wikipedia 3.nljsu.lawreview. 4. UPADHYAY & UPADHYAY, HANDBOOK ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAW [hereinafter Upadhyay] Vol. I, at 2122 (2002).

Nonetheless the government was only permitted to de-reserve the forests under strict conditions where the benefit would far outweigh the adverse effects of converting forest land into agricultural land.5 This policy would permit the British in enumerating the rights of the various persons who claimed an interest in the land and to stake a definite claim to all revenues for the state. Although there were various provisions for the protection of the local needs, these pious intentions were not implemented to a great extent, and the British continued to use the forests for the benefit of the empire, with the higher echelons of administration having great amounts of discretion, in spite of the various provisions enabling locals to claim their rights in this and Indian Forest Act, 1927.6 4. Acts and Administrative Structure Today:a.) Indian Forest Act, 1927:The IFA has not deviated from the earlier Acts to a great extent and unfortunately after independence the government has not made substantial changes to the administrative structure, in particular with respect to the high profile of the government in the forest sector. In fact the same unclear objectives can be attributed to the present forest Acts as in the colonial times and this, coupled with the lack of clarity in the hierarchy of the same has led to great difficulty in administration. This can be seen by the changing policy with respect to the various industries and the unreliability of the statistics due to the lack of proper records and unrecorded felling.7 Under the Act, the state governments have been given wide powers, especially since the forests were under state control at the time. The state could determine that a forest was one of three categories, being, a reserved forest, a protected forest or a village forest. In order to protect these categories of forests, the Act permits the state government to grant the forests officers, who may be of any rank, wide-ranging powers any powers it deems fit. A person delineated a FSO(forest station officer) however, is invested with the exclusive power to determine whether any person has claim or interest in the forest land which the state has declared it as such, irrespective of which category it belongs to. Thus this Act still reflects the colonial policy and administration under the same leads to great amounts of power vested in the state and later policies differ in object. One of the main points is that this Act, though in force, is not considered important while framing policies any longer.8 b.) Indian Forest Policy, 1952: In 1952, the Indian government, drafted a new national2 policy which concentrated on the role of the forests as revenue earners and as a major tool for the defence forces. The government accepted that the mode of administration in forests was unprofessional so far and that a balanced and complementary use of the same was necessary. However, the problem with this policy was that it merely reiterated the colonial principles and reinforced state rights with respect
5.Nljsu.law review 6. legal essays.com 7. 001); Guha & Gadgil, State Forestry and Social Conflict in British India, 123 PAST AND PRESENT 141 (1989)

to the administration and management of forests. This policy was very ambiguous with respect to the competing interests and the hierarchy of needs and this permitted the administrators to pursue its own interests within the very general guidelines prescribed by the policy. This was an unsatisfactory policy and the administration of forests reflected this since there was a definite tendency of the officials to favour the industrial needs over other competing needs and large tracts of forests were cleared and replaced with monoculture plantations of fast growing commercially valuable species. 9The Forests were continually burdened with increasing demands for timber and competing uses and the administration permitted the same without consideration to the adverse impact on the ecosystem. c.) Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 The 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976 transferred the management of forests to the concurrent list and the Centre was now entitled to enact legislation with respect to forests and wildlife along with the states.10 This was necessary because the state government had ample powers to de-reserve any forests and this led to a great number of problems in the administration since the governments used this power indiscriminately. In fact, prior to elections, the party in power would attempt to appease its vote bank by offering forest land to them. This along with the policy of giving greater weightage to cultivation and commercial functions instead of looking at forests as a complex system essential to the survival of the country has led to extensive deforestation even postindependence. As a result of this, the Central Government passed the FCA. This Act sought to prevent the state from disposing of forest lands in an arbitrary manner to satisfy the political partys short term goals.11 This Act followed the concerns about the increasing deforestation which was leading to ecological imbalance and leads to environmental deterioration. There is a restriction on the use of any forest for a non-forest use, without the permission of the Central Government. At the same time the states have not totally been restricted and are permitted to conduct any activities for the conservation and development of forests and the wildlife. In addition, under the Act there has been a change in the administrative set up whereby the Central Government is entitled to constitute an administrative committee to advise the government on either granting permission to use forests for non-forest purposes or any other matter the Central government may so desire. However, even under the Act there were several problems where the administrators were hand in glove with the timber smugglers in schemes to clear large tracts of forests illegally. They either directly committed the offences, or allowed the activities to go on while turning a blind eye to these activities. This seems unfair especially in light of the severe fines or convictions of the locals for relatively minor offences under the IFA. In order to reduce the corruption of the administration, the 1989 Amendment Act permitted forest officers to be prosecuted under the Act and be subject to the same fines as other persons.12 d.) Social Forestry Programme:Around this time the government began a new programme of social forestry which had the primary objective of providing for the fuel wood requirements of the domestic users. Social

forestry tried to bring people rather than the trees to the forefront of forest policies and programmes. The scheme constituted three components: community woodlots on common village lands, strip plantations along roadsides and canal banks, and farm forestry. Although the schemes appeared to take off, well, the problem was that the farmers very rarely used any of the timber for domestic purposes, but instead market the timber to industry and manufacturers to increase their cash income in a less labour intensive task than agriculture, thus making the very object of the programme redundant. It also led to a situation where there was loss in employment as farmers preferred to grow cash crops which were less labour intensive and gave greater income to agriculture. Social forestry was considered a failure by the government especially since the supposedly easy panacea to the problems of rural forestry did not lead to a solution which the administration envisaged.13 e.) Indian Forest Policy, 1988:Recognising the flaws in the earlier policies of the government and realising that the administration had been ineffectual in protecting the forests from destruction, partly due to the policy of using the forests as a revenue earner, the government showed a marked change in policy while forming a new Forest Policy, 1988. The principle aim of the same was to ensure environmental stability and maintenance of ecological balance. Economic benefit would be subordinate to this aim. This policy saw a renewed importance for the locals and forests with respect to their rights to live and manage the forests. In this manner it followed from the social forestry aims. However, the main object was to increase forest cover and this would even be at the cost of people if necessary. Now however, this policy is used extensively and does provide a good starting point to forest administration, although it leaves the private sector to get materials from farm forestry, without providing for the same. In addition it gives too little importance to the needs of the tribals and the locals and does not effectively address the effects of pressure of the human and livestock population on the forests, nor does it provide for wasteland development.14 f.) Joint Forest Management Programme :he JFMP has attempted to remedy some of these flaws of the 1988 policy. This also sees people as partners in the administration of forests rather than as a harmful element which must be controlled or excluded. This programme has been adopted because the previous administrative strategies have failed to arrest the degradation of forests in India. This has attempted to make protection of forests a rewarding activity and several states have adopted the programme, although they have retained different levels of control over the land. This was considered the most cost-effective mode of administering the forests, but the rights of the people were still limited to the extent that the state allowed. This system has been used extensively in some states, especially in Kerala where, in the Periyar Tiger Reserve, the people who earlier poached and engaged in felling of trees were given a hand in the management of the reserve. They have been given employment as tourist guides and they are now zealous protectors of the forests and

wildlife. This has not however, been recognised in all states where the locals are still considered hindrances to the administration of forests, possibly as a result of the Centralising trend of all the laws and policies. The forests are still in grave danger due to understaffed forest officials and the administration needs to thus recognise the benefits of such programmes.15 5. Administrative Structure of the Forest Department: In spite of the debates on whether the IFA needs to be amended or not, after the formation of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, there has been a revision in the entire structure and the mode of functioning. In contemporary times, almost every state has elected to amend the IFA to suit its own purpose and now there is a complex machinery and administrative structure at the National and State level and closely follows the following pattern:16 1. At the National Level, there exists a Director General of Forests, who frames all the policies and assists in framing the legislation; 2. He is in charge of the Forests Conservation Division, the Survey Utilisation Division, the Forest Protection Division, the Forest Policy Division and the Forest Research and Training Divisions. Each of these has its own complex structures, but effectively these organisations administer and formulate policy at the National level.17 At the state level the following structure has been envisaged3: 1. At the head of every state, there exists a Principle Chief Conservator of Forests, who is actually the technical advisor of the state. Normally no legislation or policy is framed without his input and advice; 2. Next in the hierarchy comes the Additional Principle Chief Conservator of Forests, who assists him in his functions; 3. Then come the Chief Conservators of Forests, who may directly be in charge of a large circle, or may command around two to three circles; 4. The Conservators of Forests command a circle each; 5. The Divisional Forest Officer is in charge of administration at the district level and is in command of approximately four to five ranges; 6. The Range Officers are in control of a Range and this is at the Taluka level. They are in control of around four to five blocks; 7. The Foresters are in charge of a block and they control around four to five beats; 8. Finally there is the Forest Guard who actually patrols the beats, which constitute a few square kilometres. Recently they have been granted almost all powers necessary for them to conserve the forests including the power to file FIRs in criminal matters, and to fine offenders. He is the one who actually spends time in the forests and tries to prevent unauthorised persons from destroying the forests or acting in any manner contrary to the Acts.18
11-14- summary of forests acts(google) 15. Tiwari Committee. Report of the Committee for Recommending Legislative Measures and Administrative Machinery for Ensuring Environmental Protection 16.Administartive section forest laws.ministry of environment 17. Indian Forest Policy, Forest Law, and Forest Rights Settlement:--sreechandran nljsu.

10

Although the Centre has a recent role in the administration of forests, it enjoys increasing powers especially at the level of policy formulation. Since the revenue from the forests accrue to the state, the government policy is likely to be more long term and the interests of the centre and the states do not coincide on many counts. New Steps: the Conservation of forests and Natural Eco-systems Act (Bill):19 The MoEF(Mid Ocean Escort Force) has attempted to draft a Bill to replace the IFA and to change the policy and objectives of the same. This Bill again tries to maximise the power of the state with greater amounts of control increasing concentration of decisions making at the centre. Under this Act, an FSO, is appointed in order to settle all claims with respect to land notified to be converted into reserve forests. The FSO is vested various powers in order to carry out his functions including the power to determine the carrying capacity of the forest and disallow activities which the forest cannot support. This Bill largely reduces the scope for village forests and community participation. Instead it vests complete management and control in the state and the administrative staff. This along with the limited importance it gives to the tribals would be considered its greatest flaws. However, this Bill has not been tabled before the Parliament even today. Thus the Forest Administration needs to take account of the JFMPs to a great extent to ensure true forest protection and conservation.

6. Wild Life Conservation:Wildlife conservation is the practice of protecting endangered plant and animal species and their habitats. Among the goals of wildlife conservation are to ensure that nature will be around for future generations to enjoy and to recognize the importance of wildlife and wilderness lands to humans.[1] Many nations are government agencies dedicated to wildlife conservation, which help to implement policies designed to protect wildlife. Numerous independent nonprofit organizations also promote various wildlife conservation causes. 4 Wildlife conservation has become an increasingly important practice due to the negative effects of human activity on wildlife. An endangered species is defined as a population of a living being that is at the danger of becoming extinct because of several reasons. Either they are few in number or are threatened by the varying environmental or predation parameters. The endangered species in India have been identified by different national and international organisations like the

18. Bhat Sairam, OV Nandimath, An Overview of the Legal Regime Relating to Conservation of Wildlife in India, Centre for Environmental Law, Education, Research and Advocacy, National Law School of India University, Bangalore, 2002. 19. Nandan Nelivigi, Biodiversity, Wildlife and Protected Area Management in India: A People Centred Approach, 37 (1) JILI (1995), p. 145-181. 20. M.K. Ramesh, Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 An Agenda for Reform, Prof. OV Nadimath, Bha t Sarim, Reading Material on Law of Wildlife Protection and Conservation of Forests, Centre for Environmental Law Education Research and Advocacy, Bangalore.

11

World Wildlife Fund (WWF), International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) and the Wildlife Institute of India (WII).

7. WILDLIFE ADMINISTRATION:Wildlife is synonymous with the wild biodiversity and its status is linked directly to maintenance of the life supporting processes of nature. The wildlife is considered to be a part of the food chain which is essential to support this planet and definitely warrants protection. This is especially in light of the current concerns to maintain the ecosystem as a whole. However, the plight of the animals is getting worse every year and therefore it is necessary to examine the administrative system and suggest means to ensure effective conservation of these species.22

7.1 History:Wildlife protection could be seen for the first time in certain notification by the state administrative authorities around 1927, but this was mainly to protect hunting reserves.The first time the Central government recognised protected habitats was in the 1952 National Forest policy where the government emphasised the need to protect the wildlife through special laws and the setting-up of sanctuaries and large-scale national parks. To this end, they constituted the Central Board of Wildlife under the Ministry of Food and Agriculture. Since wildlife was exclusively a state subject, could only urge and advise the states to act in a certain manner. Therefore it can be seen that conservation of wildlife as a whole has only recently come within the consciousness of the legislators and most efforts have been concerned with the protection of limited species without looking at the holistic approach. Unfortunately, this trend has continued even after the passing of the WPA.23

7.2 Acts and Administrative Structures Today: The Centre Enacted the WPA on the request of some of the states, and after the 42nd Amendment Act, made it applicable to all states. The Act seeks to protect wildlife through the creation of: 1. National parks;and 2. Sanctuaries; and recently, 3. Conservation reserve 4. Community reserve. The recognition of land as part of these areas decrees that the rights of people living in or making their livelihood through these areas, if disturbed, be duly recognised and settled. Due to the broad definition of the term wildlife, which includes the habitat of the wildlife as well, the entire ecosystem and the biodiversity is preserved by limiting the rights. The distinction in the rights

12

and the manner of notification between National Parks a5nd Sanctuaries seems flawed however, and before determining the level of traditional rights, a more thorough scientific approach is necessary rather than the current model of state discretion. The Act envisages a complex administrative structure where the Central Government is empowered to appoint a Director of Wildlife Preservation along with assistant directors and various other employees to assist him in his functioning. At the state level, the Wildlife Department is headed by a Chief Wildlife Warden .He is in charge of the Wildlife and Assistant Wildlife Wardens and together they are in charge of actual administration of the Act. The Act provides for a National Board of Wildlife and for State Boards for Wildlife which are supposed to promote the conservation and development of wild life and forests by such measures as they think fit. In addition, the Act mandated that every state appoint a collector to determine the rights of any person under the land which has been notified as a sanctuary. The State government was mandated to constitute an advisory committee to advise the department on the measures to be taken for better conservation and management of sanctuaries including the participation of people in and around the sanctuary. An important aspect to administrating the wildlife and its habitat is that in India most protected areas are inhabited by local communities, who are heavily dependent on the same. There is thus a constant conflict between the human rights and animal welfare activists with respect to the rights in the forest and this makes administration very difficult. Human rights activists claim that tribal rights are denied, and at the same time, the administration is throwing open the protected habitats to mining and other so called development projects which are ruining the habitats completely and are completely against the object of the Act. A middle path needs to be achieved and the Act has tried to provide for one, and locals have been given a greater role than any of the forest Acts, especially in those which are national parks and that have been delineated as conservation reserves by the state.25 This is very important because history can throw up several examples to show that the future of various endangered species has been determined by the decisions of policy makers who often have no information of the ground realities regarding the actual habitat of the species. There have been innumerable cases where the policy makers seem to frame the law taking into account nothing but their limited knowledge at a seat far from the domain of the wildlife they try to protect. These ill-informed reforms in fact tend to worsen the plight of these animals. There is therefore need for more field-work based and scientific studies to give better information on the ranging and habitat use than the conventional natural history methods. This would ensure that the laws are adequate and the lands and the mandate of the laws can be administered effectively. One of the most important aspects is the implementation of the existing laws against the poachers, who are driven by a huge international demand for animal parts. The problem is that the rampant poaching that occurs is often done by politically well-connected poachers who kill purely for pleasure or huge revenues without any compunction whatsoever. Despite the stringent laws against the same in the WPA, the administrators often have to let them off because of their
25.

Nandan Nelivigi, Biodiversity, Wildlife and Protected Area Management in India : A People Centred Approach, (1) JILI (1995), p. 145-181.

13

connections and the enforcers often are unable to do anything to prevent them. This is exacerbated by the fact that the officials are heavily understaffed and often do not have access even to the basic facilities such as transport, education, housing, especially in the lower rungs. Salaries are low and there are too many encounters where officials are killed by poachers and timber thieves. This is a definite problem which needs to be countered and again giving locals responsibility might help. Recently, in 2002, a New NWAP 2002-2016, was released, which has focused mainly on the manner in which wildlife should be conserved. It looks at legally notified areas as the main tool along with the participation of communities and sensitisation of developmental factors towards conservation issues. The NWAP recognises the need for legislators to become more ecologically sensitised along with other citizens. Short term economic goals should not be permitted to undermine ecological security. By declaring these natural sites as ecologically sensitive zones under the EPA, the government can regulate all developmental activities in these areas and censure that the wildlife is looked at. One of the problems is that they have only looked at the administration of protected areas, to the detriment of the biodiversity outside the area. The Plan approves and gives a great thrust to the idea of community reserves, which has been added on by the 2002 Amendment Act. One problem is that the role of the Panchayats has still not been recognised in forest administration. Nonetheless the plan is a step forward and steps should be taken to incorporate the suggestions in the administration of wildlife.26 Wildlife laws in India can be traced back to early third century BC, when Ashoka, the Emperor, codified a law for the preservation of wildlife and environment. Thereafter came several laws among which, the first codified law was the Wild Bird Protection Act, 1887, enacted by the British Government. The Government of India brought for the first time a comprehensive act, the Wildlife Protection Act (WPA), 1972, which was later amended and changes were brought in as the need arose. Furthermore, to protect the wildlife, the Government of India also became a signatory to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) since October, 1976. Besides WPA and CITES; the Indian Penal Code, 1860; the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C), 1973; Customs Act, 1962; Indian Forest Act, 1927; Forest Conservation Act, 1981; Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 are some of the important weapons available for check and control of wildlife offences including trade.27 Wild Life Protection Act (WPA), 1972 provides for the protection of Wild animals, birds and plants and for matters connected therewith or ancillary or incidental thereto. It extends to the whole of India, except the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The act includes all animals like birds, mammals etc. While the act clearly defines hunting it also prohibits the usage, supply etc. of animal articles, Animal article means an article made from any captive animal or wild animal, other than vermin, and includes an article or object in which the whole or any part of such animal has been used and ivory imported into India. Section 9 of the Act prohibits hunting of wild animals and birds specified in Schedule I, II, and III and IV, except as provided under Sections XI and XII. This classification has been made keeping in mind the significance and population of wildlife. Those highly threatened find a place in Schedule I.

14

As of punishment for offences, Section 51 of the Act prescribes a maximum imprisonment of six years, Rs 25,000 fine or both for hunting animals and birds specified on Schedule I. 8. ADMINISTRATIVE DIFFICULTIES AND SOLUTIONS

The Administrators themselves acknowledge various problems in the manner in which the forests and wildlife habitats are administered and they are often unable to fulfil their mandate. Problems and Solutions: Theory and Practice:There are innumerable factors which interfere in the administration of the Forests and the Wildlife. For one, the FCA, vests great amounts of power in the Central Government, while at the same time, the National Forest Policy 1988, tries to give the locals more power in management of forests in line with the 73rd and 74th Amendments. This makes administration very difficult since the officials have to follow conflicting orders while protecting the forests. What needs to be noted is that there are various competing interests with respect to forests, which include the Wildlife lovers, the industrialists, the rural activists and the foresters themselves. In administration, the foresters have tried very hard to retain absolute control over the forest lands and the total discretion which goes with the same, while outwardly upholding scientific expertise in the management of forests. In addition, the administrators have, either at their own behest, or due to political pressure, consistently put the interests of the industrial community over ecological integrity and the local communities. The problem is that the Acts dont recognise these various competing interests and the different Acts contemplate and give weightage to different interests. In fact, the laws relating to protection of the wildlife tend to conflict with the laws relating to development; this often puts the administration in a dilemma as to which laws to follow and since the MoEF is very weak, compared to the commercial interests at the national level, development takes place at the cost of the environment. These interests need to be reconciled, by making the developmental laws subject to the laws protecting the wildlife and their habitat. This difference in polices also leads to confusion among the locals and administration since forest officials cannot penalise the locals for following another policy set by another wing of the government. Mr. Singh cited one illustration where the animal husbandry department required persons in hilly areas to keep goats. However these goats had no grazing area except the forests, and thus they came to head with the forest department. Thus there seems a definite need for a holistic approach to maintaining the environment, biodiversity in particular, which will make for easier enforcement. The proposed Forest Bill, which has been in the pipeline for several years, was supposed to solve this problem, but the legislature has not approved of the same. There is definite necessity for the same along with a more integrated approach to forest and wildlife, where both are paid equal attention and yet are looked at together to ensure more effective administration of flora and fauna, especially since Wildlife has been recognised very recently as important enough to have a

15

separate department for its conservation. In addition, the EPA, which purportedly provides for an administrative structure does not deal extensively with either forests or wildlife. Another problem associated with these Acts is that they utilise a top-down approach where one or two representatives sign an international treaty and then, since the same is binding on the country, sit with some experts to formulate a law in accordance with those obligations. The people who might actually be affected by the law and who might have constructive suggestions on how the problems might actually be resolved, since they have a stake in the issue are not even aware for most part of the proposed legislations, forget being consulted in the process of formulation of the same. The Forest Officials claim that the administration is unnecessarily being made scapegoats for the state of the forests today, whereas the actual reasons for the same are exploding human and cattle populations, which lead to a demand on resources which the forest cannot meet. The Forest Departments are often helpless because of constant human encroachment and the lack of wildlife corridors, which are even more difficult to maintain. They do not even have the funds or the power to acquire more land bordering on the forests to keep the humans away.They claim that the Centre must permit the administrators greater power in deciding how to actually manage the forests, instead of merely forcing them to follow directions. This attitude has also come in the way of the JFMPs(joint finance mortgaging programme) which the Centre has been encouraging. This programme constitutes a joint effort at administration by both the villagers and the state to protect and renew degraded forests. The bureaucracy has rejected this to a large extent because of the reduction on their powers and in addition the state has not taken account of regional differences while streamlining and adapting these programmes to individual states. However, the Central government has taken a step forward in admitting that the earlier failures were possibly due to a top-down approach in administration where few forest and wildlife guards attempted to protect the forest in opposition to the locals, instead of in cooperation with them.

9. Judicial View of Forest and Wildlife Administration: Often in cases when the states or the administration does nothing to protect the forests and wildlife, the Courts have had to intervene and ensure that the forests and the wildlife actually are protected and true conservation takes place. This is done through the mechanisms of PILs, innovative interpretation of Article 21 and protection of human rights, and development of environmental principles. One such instance is that of T.N. Godavarman Thriumalpad v. Union of India, where the court set up a Centrally Empowered Committee to determine the grievances of all persons against the formation and determination of rights, and the administrative corruption with respect to protected areas. Such a Grievance mechanism is essential to settle the different interests in forest lands and the present mechanism envisaged by the Act is inadequate because the same department is deciding the matter and hearing the grievances as well while settling rights.

16

There are many other cases where the Courts have had to intervene to restore justice when the administration, due to ambiguities has been unable to manage the forests and protected areas properly. An illustration can be seen in the case of Nagarhole Budakattu Hakku Sthaapana Samiti v. State f Karnataka, where the officials had permitted a Resort to function in the midst of a National Park. The Court, after examining the issue claimed that this was contrary to the FCA, and ordered the resort to stop all activities and handover the land to the state. Thus the Court has interfered with the administration on many occasions to ensure that the administrative machinery is taking note of the legislative provisions and interpreting the provisions for better conservation of the forest. However for most part the Court has tended to trust the policy decisions of the Centre and refuses to intervene in the same. shahtoosh case-36 The Shahtoosh wool is derived from the soft undercoat of the Tibetan Antelope (also known as Chiru), which has to be killed before its fleece is removed. Three to four Chiru have to be killed to weave only one shawl. Each shawl can cost several thousand dollars in the international market. In 1977, the Government of India declared the Chiru as protected under Schedule I of the Wildlife (Protection) Act of India, 1972. Killing of Chiru is also in contravention to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), of which India is also a signatory as mentioned earlier. A PIL or Public Interest Litigation was filed in the J&K High Court seeking implementation of the provisions of their Wildlife (Protection) Act as well as CITES which prohibits the import of Shahtoosh into India. On May 1, 2000, the Honorable High Court issued a judgment forcing the government to enact and enforce its wildlife law. Finally in 2002 the manufacture of Shahtoosh shawls has finally been banned in the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

10. Flaws and loop holes in forest acts and administration:In my personal words, forest acts were drafted in excellent way but poor in implementation of laws. Indian Government getting no affect in deforestation of Forest lands in the name of development. Grabbing the lands of tribals and destroying the forest lands affects the natural habitats of the Forest lands. Permitting the unlawful mining in Forest lands, influencing the government officials in achieving their Permissions for mining and performing illegal activities. Though the provisions in the acts are prohibiting the dangerous and harmful activities affecting the forests, Ministries must take proper inspection on the administration and execution of laws by officials. 11. Government role in administering laws affectively:The high-level National Advisory Council wants better implementation of the Forest Rights Act to ensure tribals receive their entitlements. But the ministry has rejected its proposals

17

The National Advisory Council (NAC) has suggested ways to improve and reform the Forest Rights Act that the United Progressive Alliance government introduced in 2006. According to latest reports, though, the tribal affairs ministry has rejected incorporating these suggestions in the law.

The Act, aimed at restoring forestland to tribals and increasing their access to timber and forest produce, gave tribals certain rights that they do not enjoy. In many tribal-dominated states, the dispossession and alienation of tribals is believed to have led to an increase in Maoist activity.

With economic empowerment of tribal communities and forest-dwellers as its primary objective, the FRA was once seen as a potential tool for central and state governments to curtail the influence of the Maoists.

But the law has always been contentious and ambiguous in many aspects. According to a status report released by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) in August last year, of the 2.9 million claims settled under the FRA, only 1.6% offered community rights and most of those did not include rights over minor forest produce (MFP). The focus was mostly on giving individual titles to agricultural and residential land.

The NACs working group on tribal matters believes that the Act has been poorly implemented and has many loopholes. It recommended:

Transparency in the rights recognition process as too many claims were being rejected. Arbitrary decisions were being made at the district and lower levels, which should be curbed. The Act allows for collective rights over forestland and resources, which is not being implemented. More proactive involvement of the government is required in this and in extending timber rights. primacy of the gram sabha as the quasi-judicial body that makes real decisions must be reinforced. The Act provides for it but the states and Centre have so far been trying to diminish the role of the village council.

18

The NAC, a high-level advisory body that was constituted to set the UPA governments agenda for the social sector, also made proposals for improving implementation of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) and had forwarded suggestions regarding the Food Security Bill. The government has however not taken these suggestions on board.

12. Findings: How has the manner of administrating the forest and wildlife policies evolved over time? What are the administrative structures envisaged under the Acts and policies? What are the problems that the administration faces in managing the forests and wildlife sanctuaries? Judicial Prespective of Forest Administrations, with decided case laws. What are the solutions to the same? Which are the best methods of administration? 13. Conclusion:There are various sources of environmental laws, which include Constitutional Provisions, laws enacted by the Parliament and State legislatures, policies formulated by the states and international obligations towards protecting the environment. There is however, no overarching law taking account of all the plans relating to the same and due to the conflicts in the same, it is obvious that the government must take a holistic approach and look environment sustenance as such. An overarching policy is necessary with enough flexibility for local variations.

With respect to forest laws in particular, the state needs to ensure more involvement of the citizens and the locals in the area to ensure true conservation of the biodiversity as a whole. The administrative machinery has not been able to arrest the degradation of forests on its own, and the cooperation of communities is essential to the survival of the rich biodiversity India boasts of.

The government has recognised this as can be seen by the various schemes such as the JFMP, but few states have taken steps towards the implementation of the same. In addition, the Schedule Tribes (Recognition of Forest Tribes) Bill,also seeks to allow traditional rights and local participation, but has several flaws and has in fact antagonised the administration against the beneficiaries. One solution would be to shelve the Bill and instead permit the tribals to continue with their traditional roles in the forest and at the same time, encourage the growth of village forests[xcii] and promote a system where all forest dwellers are given some rights to the forest

19

and in exchange can help manage them.[xciii] In fact legitimising the rights of the users in the immediate vicinity of the forests would actually motivate subsistence users to participate in afforestation programmes, thereby even reducing the cost of enforcement.since administration depends on the cooperation of the locals to a great extent.

This would ensure a holistic approach, which looks at the environment as well as the rights of the local and the forest dwelling communities. This can look towards preservation and due to the reduced burden on the administration they can look towards new initiatives to increase the amount of forest cover and protection of the wildlife. This would lead to a situation where, due to scientific study, the communities could live in harmony with the forests and wildlife and lead to a richer and healthier ecosystem.

THE GREATNESS OF THE NATION CAN BE JUDGED BY THE WAY ITS ANIMALS ARE TREATED--- Mahatma Gandhi

14. Table of Cases: Consumer Education and Research Society v. Union of India, (2000) 1 SCALE 606. Nagarhole Budakattu Hakku Sthaapana Samiti v. State f Karnataka, AIR 1997 Kar 288. Cambridge, CUP, 1999.ty in India: 1200-1991TN Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India, (2002) 10 SCC 606. Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India, (1993) Sup (3) SCC 115. Fatehchand Himmatlal v. State of Maharashtra, 1977(2) SCR 828. Ivory Traders and Manufacturers Association v. Union of India, AIR 1997 Delhi 267. Jesse W. Clarke v. Haberle Crystal Springs Brewing Company, 280 U.S. 384 Minerva Mills v. Union of India, (1992) 3 SCC 336. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad v. Jan Mohammed Usmanbhai, AIR 1986 SC 1205. Pappasam Labour Union v. Madura Coats Ltd., (1993) 1 SCC 501. State of Bihar v. Murad Ali Khan, (1988)4 SCC 655. Ambika Quarry Works v. State of Gujarat, MANU/SC/0050/1986 Banwasi Seva Ashram v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1987 SC 374. M.C.Mehta v. Kamalnath (1997) 1 SCC 388. Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P., 1989 Suppl (1) SCC 504. State of Orissa v. Duti Sahu AIR 1997 SC 1040. State of Tripura v. Sudhir Kumar Raj Nath AIR 1997 SC 1168.

20

15. Bibilography:Articles:

AJT Johnsingh, Policy Makers and Wildlife, Hindu Folio on Wildlife, Sept. 6, 1998, p. 10-13. Amita Baviskar, Fate of the Forest: Conservation and Tribal Rights,29(38) EPW (1994) 2493-2498. Anonymous, Wildlife Mismanagement in India: Mutually Assured Destruction, 8(12) Down to Earth, (2000), p. 1998-2002. Anonymous, Wildlife Protection and Peoples Livelihood, 34(33) EPW (1999) p. 23052310. Ashish Kothari, Saloni Suri, Neena Singh, Conservation in India: A New Direction, 30(43) EPW(1995) p. 2755-2769. Ashwini Chhatre, A Summary and Critique of the Draft Forest Bill, cf. SR Hiremath et al (Ed.), All About Draft Forest Bill and Forest Lands, Dharwad, Samaj Parivartan Samudaya, 1996, p. 40-42. Chhatrapati Singh, On Survival: Forestry and the Law, 5(3) Lokayan Bulletin, (1987), p. 8-15. CP Oberoi, Wildlife Conservation, Employment News, August 2000, p. 4, 12. D Arora From State Regulation to Peoples Participation: Case of Forests Management in India, 29(20) EPW (1994) p. 691-698. Gopal Naik, Joint Forest Management: Factors Influencing Household Participation, 32 (48) EPW(1997) p. 3084-3091. Harry Blair, Social Forestry: Time to Modify Goals?, 21(30) EPW (1987) p. 1317-1322. M.K. Ramesh, Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 An Agenda for Reform, Prof. OV Nadimath, Bhat Sarim, Reading Material on Law of Wildlife Protection and Conservation of Forests, Centre for Environmental Law Education Research and Advocacy, Bangalore. Mahesh Rangarajan, Imperial and Indias Forests: The Early History of Indian Forestry, 1800-1878, 31(2) The Indian Economic and Social History Review, (1994), 147-165. MV Nadkarni, Forests in the Economy of India, 7(1) The Indian Journal of Social Science, (1994), 33-45. Nandan Nelivigi, Biodiversity, Wildlife and Protected Area Management in India: A People Centred Approach, 37 (1) JILI (1995), p. 145-181. NS Chandrasekharan, KN Chandrashekhara Pillai, Legal Aspects of Nationalisation of Trade in Wildlife and Animal Articles, 16(3) CULR (1985), 485-490. Noorjahan Bava, Environmental Protection and Administration in India: Role of Government, Parliament and Supreme Court, 50(1) Indian Journal of Public Administration, (2004), p. 72-91. R Krishna Rao, Social Costs of Social Forestry, 23 (50) EPW (1988) p. 2629. Ramachandra Guha, Forestry, Debate and Draft Forest Act: Who Wins, Who Loses?, 29 (34) EPW(1994), p. 2192-2196. Ramchandra Guha, Forestry in the British and Post-British India, an Historical AnalysisI, XVII (44)EPW, (1983), p. 1882-1896. (Part I) Ramchandra Guha, Forestry in the British and Post-British India, an Historical AnalysisII, XVII (44)EPW, (1983), p. 1940-1945. (Part II)

21

Sanjay Upadhyay, Ashish Kothari, National Parks and Sanctuaries in India: A Guide to Legal Provisions, Kalpavrish, Enviro-Legal Defence Firm, 2000. Shashi Kant, Joint Forest Management: Some Issues and Peoples Participation, Department of Bio-Sciences, Jammu and Kashmir, CEERA, National Law School of India University, Bangalore.

Books: Armen

Rosencranz, Shyam Divan, Martha Noble, Environmental Law and Policy in India: Cases, Meterials and Statutes, Bombay, NM Tripathi Pvt. Ltd., 1995. Bhaskar Vira, Institutional Change in Indias Forest Sector, 1976-1994: Reflections on State Policy, OCEES Research Paper No. 5, Oxford Centre for the Environment, Ethics and Society, Oxford, 1995. BR Beotra, The Indian Forest Act, Allahabad, Law Book Co., Publishers, 1965. Mohan Hirabai Hiralal, Village forest: Gateway to Sustainable and Participatory Community Forest Management, Chandrapur, Vrikshamitra, 2002. Sumit Guha, Environment and Ethnicity in India: 1200-1991, Cambridge, CUP, 1999. SR Hiremath (ed.), All About Draft Forest Bill and Forest Lands, Dharwad, Samaj Parivartan Samudaya, 1996. V Desai, Forest Management in India: Issues and Problems, Himalya Publishing House, Bombay, 1991.

22

Acknowledgement

This project entitled Doctorial study on Forest and Wild life Protection is submitted in fulfilment of the requirement for the Project work for Corporate laws, DamoDaram Sanjeevaya National Law University. This research work is done by M.Anudeep Reddy, VII Semester , .This research work has been done only for LAW Project purpose only. The assistance and help during the execution of the project has been fully acknowledged. Very thankful to Madhavi. M , our teacher, for contributing his efforts in building this wonderful piece.

23

Subject:- Environmental Law

Submitted by:- M.Anudeep Reddy

Topic:- Indian Forest and Wild Life Administartion A Critique

Roll no:- 200905, VII SEMESTER