The Times of India, Bombay, March 21, 1987

Revamping forest policy

R.B. Mishra & S.V. Prabhath

It is needless to reiterate the vital role that forests play in a nation’s economy. Forests perform both protective and productive functions. In their protective role, they prevent the deterioration and wasting away of the soil, temper the climate and regulate stream flow, without which it would be impossible to organise agriculture efficiently.

Forests occupy slightly more than 21 per cent of the geographical area of India, but their contribution to national income is less than one per cent. This is extremely low. The agricultural sector (except animal husbandry) generates nearly 40 times the forest income with only about twice the forest area.

Even though the protective functions of the forests, which are essentially non-productive, keep the levels of income low, the disproportionately low income in relation to the area occupied by the forests amply speaks of how low their productivity is and how poorly they are managed. It is, therefore, imperative that serious attention is paid to the understanding of basic problems and their solutions. The basic needs seem to be to evolve the right policy, to enunciate principles, to decide on objectives and finally to implement effectively the accepted policy and principles.

In India, very little thinking has been done so fare by way of research in the economics of forestry. For example, even a proper inventory of the various types of trees is not available. Nobody seems to be certain about the extent of the protective functions performed by the forests and whether these can be achieved only through the forests. It has often been claimed that soil erosion can be equally prevented by growing folder crops and developing pasture lands. The economics of such alternative systems has not been still worked out authentically. For example, timber-growing trees take 100 to 125 years to mature. In view of the rapidly changing technology, one never knows what will happen during these long years. On the other hand, there are chemical processes which can turn soft wood into timber. Trees producing soft wood mature quickly. Hence, the wisdom of timber plantation is questionable. Similarly, keeping in view the developments in the technology of wood processing and changes in income and consumer preferences, there is an urgent need to assess the potentialities of the forests and carry out the studies of the demand for various products.

Another important problem that needs to be explored is the price and cost relationship. While it is generally believed that higher prices of forest products may lead to good forestry and better management, in some of the studies relating to timber-growing, has been found that higher prices of forest products may lead to good forestry and better management, in some of the studies relating to timber-growing, has been found that an exactly opposite trend is discernible. Prices and costs are so linked that the economic position of the forester is not a whit changed. It is also important to ascertain the significance of location of forests in relation to transport costs. All these and many more questions have to be looked into utilise most effectively the available resources to help satisfy our wants.

The first important fact is the proportion of forest area to total land area in the country. Relevant data on the geographical area are presented in Appendix I. Indian forestors seem to be obsessed with the idea that the forest should occupy at least one-third of the total land area, and the efforts should be to increase the forest area continuously until that stage is reached. However, in spite of this wishful thinking, forceful propaganda to convince the public of its importance, and various efforts by the forest officials to implement effectively various afforestation and regeneration programmes, the disconcerting feature is that the proportion of forest area has been declining year after year. Mere important is the fact that forest area is falling even in absolute terms. Why does this happen? The simple answer is when the chips are down the distinction has to be made between what is more productive and what is less productive, economically.

In fact very little thinking has been done on the problem of the size of forest areas desirable in the country. The only place where this point is mentioned appears to be the National Forest Policy enunciated as far back as 1952, where it is stated that the forests should occupy one-third of the total land area. But this document nowhere discussed the apparently desirable perspective; the rationale for the proportion of forests is to be at the aforesaid level. It has only been stated that forests should occupy one-third of the total area because they perform important protective and productive functions and because some other countries have one-third of their area under forest. These cannot be considered valid reasons. In some of the works, it has been stated explicitly that the prosperity and these proportions are highly co-related. In that case why restrict to one third, why not have more or less? It might be remarked that the proportion of the forest areas in many countries is below 33.3 per cent, e.g. Australia 4.2, Denmark 10.2, France 10.2, the United Kingdom 7.3, Pakistan 3.7 and Ethiopia 7.3. The basic question is how these countries are managing to keep their soil conditions good or climate all right? Some of them are known to have prosperous agriculture. It appears that the national forest policy was greatly influenced by the U.S.A. proportion of forest. This is why the situation in other countries perhaps escaped the attention of policy makers in 1952.

The question of deciding upon the size of the total forest area in any nation has two perspectives viz. protective function and productive function. The nature and extent of the protective functions to be performed by the forest will depend on the prevailing soil and climatic conditions and future requirements of these conditions. The nature and extent of these functions will differ from region to region. Hence, while formulating the new forest policy, the current prevailing soil and climatic conditions in each region, the type of soil and climate which is possibly desirable in each of these regions in a relatively near future and how much of these requirements can be economically met by the forests be taken into account.

In other words, it has to be recognised that the protective functions performed by the forests will differ from region to region. Nature and extent of these functions can be determined only after a comprehension of the three above mentioned aspects that govern them. Once this is done, one can fix the size of the forests which presumably will pay the desired protective role.

However, the size would be valid only for a short period of time.

The comparative profitability, the potential demands, the price-cost relationship etc. will have to be determined for each of the commodities in the forestry sector. Further, the allocation of land among agriculture, forestry and other uses will have to be done dispassionately on similar economic considerations. The proper allocation of land among various sectors is all the more important because of the prevailing food shortage in the country and the consequent need for greater agricultural production. The only policy that can govern the distribution of land is the one that maximises the economic benefits to society. Once this principle is realised and accepted, it will be readily recognised that the concept of a fixed proportion of forest areas to total geographical areas will not hold good. There cannot be anything like fixed proportion. It has to keep on changing and each time question of distribution crops up, the most economic enterprise that can be organised on each tract of land will have to be ascertained.

Our forest policy, though it emphasises the need to increase the area under forests, does not, however, take into consideration the fact that we always aim to preserve and protect the forests in few pockets while those areas which are now shorn off forest cover are totally left out. This will not only lead to resentment among the inhabitants of those pockets as they are deprived of benefits from other sectors but would also lead to environmental problems in the shorn off areas.

The problem of grazing for various kinds of animals in the forest areas is to be further discussed in the light of urbanisation, shrinking areas of forests, illegal occupations of grazing land etc. Hordes of starved and semi-starved animals ravage the forest by trampling on new and tender plantations, eating away the leaves and shoots etc. As a result it is very difficult for a plant to survive until it reaches a safe height. It is known that most grazing, particularly if it is unlimited and uncontrolled, is incompatible with scientific forestry. On the other hand, there are graziers who have been driving their cattle with or without permission into the forests for generations. They consider it their right. In fact they are oblivious, perhaps ignorant of the ill effects ruthless grazing has on the forests. National Forest Policy of 1952 realised the situation and stated that grazing must be accepted as a hard fact. Thus every forester feels anxious about indiscriminate grazing practices while every grazier thinks that he has a right to derive the maximum benefit from the forests. This in short is the problem.

The situation is the result of a very long-standing tradition in which grazing has been persistently going on in the vast stretches of forest areas. The long and continued practice of grazing from times immemorial, has automatically vested in the graziers the right which is almost legal of leading their cattle into the forests. Nobody can take away these rights from them. All efforts to persuade them to do anything else are bound to result in complete failure. It might also be added that the forest administration has not been able to achieve much development of pasture areas with the result that the available resources for cattle may well diminish with time. This will result in greater destruction of other plantations by cattle (since they have less to eat) and then greater over-use of grass lands, etc. Thus a circle has been generated, incurring greater losses to both the parties.

To break through this vicious circle and for better implementation of forestry development programmes, all grazing in the forests has to go on in some pre-determined orderly fashion. What seems to be apparently possible to circumvent the situation is that the forest administration first recognises the situation in the above mentioned perspective and then develops programmes of demonstration of what they mean by proper grazing. It is contended that by improved grazing, practices of a unit area would yield more and superior grass. To break the vicious circle, this appears to be the practical approach and it is for the forest administration to take a lead in initiating the demonstration programmes with vigour and zeal. All this briefly means that a proper grazing policy has to be adopted, the pasture lands have to be developed in accordance with the adopted policy and demonstrations to show the advantages of the right practices are to be carried out. Intensive involvement of agriculture, veterinary and forest departments in a co-ordinated manner to deal with pasture development so as to meet the increasing needs of grazing, is required to meet the problem squarely. What is lacking is a method by which systematic grazing techniques are elicited from all these departments in an integrated manner.

The foregoing is a sort review of the grazing problem and that of what is apparently practicable in the situation. However, it may be worth while to examine briefly the available data in this context in order to find whether they throw any further light on the problem and whether they suggest some new line of thinking.

The main data available in this connection relates to the number of animals grazed by cattle types and receipts to the forest department for grazing. These are reported in the Indian Forest Statistics for all India and for the states till 1957-58 but both the animals grazed and the forest revenue do not show much changes at the all-India level. The fluctuations are minor, giving rise to suspicion about inaccuracy of data and unsuitability of data for perspective projections. However, a very cursory examination of the information derived from the data shows the following trends :- (a) The percentage of each category of animal grazing in the forests to its total population is 10.6 for cows and bullocks, 8.5 for buffaloes 11.2 for goats and sheep. All these means that 313 lakhs (one tenth of total) of animals graze in the forests annually; the cows and buffaloes forming the single largest group;

(b) The live-stock population is rising annually at the rate of two per cent and that the grazing number is under-reported projecting that the supply of cattle fodder from forests is not likely to keep up with the corresponding increase in demand. The threat from cattle to frests may assume an alarming proportion;

(c) As for every four persons in the country, there are three animals, out of these two are cows, bullocks and buffaloes. Maintenance of this is already huge and further increase in the size of life-stock population will result in promiscous breeding and lead to perpetration of the animals in wretched conditions, reflecting the considerable less productivity per animal.

(d) The incidence of the cattle is very high in the country, average being 101 animals of all species per sq. km. Thus forests can sustain only a negligible number of animals in relation to other lands arable and non-arable. Hence, the study of grazing potential which our forests have and the grazing potential which can possibly be developed with improved grazing practices involving rotational or intermittent intensive methods;

(e) The grazing fee charged by the forest department is nominal - 23 paise per animal. The grazing rates levied are not anything like economic rates. If the grazing rates are increased, it may add a valuable revenue to forest department which can be effectively utilised in pasture development and other programmes. But the possible consequences of an upward revision of grazing rates with their political overtones will have to be studied before an increase can be envisaged.

Land hunger takes a heavy toll of our forests. Population explosion, coupled with the problem of desire to possess, more and more land y vested interests is leading to large-scale encroachments of forests lands. Unfortunately this vital problem did not receive proper attention either from the forest department or policy-makers. New villages are springing up overnight and large areas are filled to make provision for agriculture. There is an imminent need to tackle this problem and to identify at the local level such areas where this problem is likely to arise. Redemptive measures have to be taken well in advance to counteract the problem.

It is by now quite clear that our country may well be confronted with an acute shortage of industrial wood unless far-reaching steps are taken to expedite the increase in its production. Five-year plans speak of the probable shortages. Against the current production of nearly 30 million cubic metres, the requirement has been estimated to increase to about 40 million cubic metres per year in the ensuing years. Even with improvements in logging techniques and after clearing some of the old untapped forest areas, it is estimated that with the current methods of management, the production may not exceed beyond 10 to 15 million cubic metres per year. This shortage can be overcome through the adoption of three important steps: (1) the planting of quick-growing species e.g. eucalyptus and pinus; (2) the planting of other economic species like acacia, boswellia, cassia, albizzia, grevellia, ailanthus, bombax etc. and (3) planting under the scheme for rehabilitation of the degraded forests. These steps would appreciably affect the supply of industrial wood and the deficits during the ensuing years may have to be overcome by using even the secondary species with the aid of proper seasoning and preservation of measures. However, plantation of quick-growing species etc., should be done only in such areas which are allocated to respective industries for forestry purposes. Plantation of these species in degraded or low-density areas again with not be compatible with environmental considerations.

To achieve this objective, the adoption of quick-growing species and intensification of production is necessary. For successful intensification, the areas should be carefully selected by reference to ecological considerations whereas the species should be selected with reference to the uses in view. Tentative locations should be fixed for the industrial sites to integrate the plantations and the industries. It is estimated that by bringing only one per cent of the forest area in the country under intensive production it should be possible to double the output of industrial wood.

Broadly speaking, soil and climate may be considered to be the two prominent factors influencing the growth of trees. Flat and superior lands available in different regions have been occupied traditionally for agriculture but inferior and medium types of hilly and undulating lands interspersed at places with small patches of good soil only in valleys. Here, the role of planting trees under private sector can not be overlooked. The experiment has been yielding good results.

Any guidelines to forestry will become meaningless if they are devoid of the realities of the situation pertaining to the needs of the local people and families dwelling upon the forests. Urbanisation, increasing population and development activities in remote forest places have been causing degeneration of forests and at the same time they are incapable of meeting the local people's needs. For achieving all these, a realistic, systematic practical, productive and employment-oriented approach is needed which seems to be far off from the sight of the planners and government authorities.