Context

• The Lok Sabha passed the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023, with no substantive changes from the original version.
• As the bill received both positive and negative feedbacks, it is important to understand the bill in its entirety and evaluate the issues accordingly.

Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill 2023

• The Bill seeks to amend the Forest Conservation Act 1980 – a legislation enacted to protect India’s forest.
• The 1980 Act empowers the Central government to regulate the extraction of forest resources — from timber and bamboo to coal and minerals — by industries as well as forest-dwelling communities. 
• The key changes to the Act include inserting a ‘preamble’ that underlines –
  • India’s commitment to preserving forests, their biodiversity and tackling challenges from climate change and
  • Amending the name of the Act to Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam (translated as Forest Conservation and Augmentation) from the existing Forest (Conservation) Act.
• The amendments also say that the Act would only apply to lands notified in, any government record, as ‘forest’ on or after 1980.

 Key Features of Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023

• Land under the Purview of the Act
  • Land declared/notified as a forest under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 or under any other law, or
  • Land not covered in the first category but notified as a forest on or after October 25, 1980 in a government record.
• Exempted Categories of Land
  • The Bill exempts certain types of land from the provisions of the Act, such as forest land along a rail line or a public road maintained by the government.
  • Forest land situated 100 km away from international borders and to be used for “strategic projects of national importance” or land ranging from 5-10 hectares for security and defence projects would also be exempted from the Act’s stipulations.
• Assignment/Leasing of Foreign Land
  • Under the Act, a state government requires prior approval of the central government to assign forest land to any entity not owned or controlled by government.  
  • In the Bill, this condition is extended to all entities, including those owned and controlled by government. 
  • It also requires that prior approval be subject to terms and conditions prescribed by the central government.
• Permitted Activities in Forest Land
  • The Act restricts the de-reservation of forests or use of forest land for non-forest purposes. 
  • Such restrictions may be lifted with the prior approval of the central government.
  • Non-forest purposes include use of land for cultivating horticultural crops or for any purpose other than re-afforestation.
  • The Act specifies certain activities that will be excluded from non-forest purposes, meaning that restrictions on the use of forest land for non-forest purposes will not apply.
  • The Bill adds more activities to this list such as –
    • zoos and safaris under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 owned by the government or any authority, in forest areas other than protected areas,
    • ecotourism facilities,
    • silvicultural operations (enhancing forest growth), and
    • any other purpose specified by the central government.
• Power to Issue Directions: The Bill adds that the central government may issue directions for the implementation of the Act to any authority/organisation under or recognized by the centre, state, or union territory (UT).

 Issues Related to the Bill

• Deviation from the Original Law (Forest Conservation Act 1980)
  • TheAct of 1980adopted a protectionist stance which made forest clearances time consuming and costly to obtain.
  • While current development needs and priorities must be recognised, this Bill deviates in a significant manner from the spirit of the original law.
  • Three points that emerge from the Bill have caused considerable anxiety among environmental experts:
    • The narrowed definition of forests under its scope.
    • The exclusion of significant tracts of forest areas.
    • The granting of sanction to additional activities that were regulated earlier.
• The Bill can Restrict the Application of the Godavarman Judgment, 1996 
  • The judgement had extended the scope of the 1980 Act to the dictionary meaning of ‘forest’ — that is, areas with trees rather than just areas legally notified as forest.
  • The present Amendment restricts to only legally notified forests and forests recorded in government records on or after October 25, 1980.
  • This change could potentially impact around 28% of India’s forest cover, encompassing almost 2,00,000 square kilometres. 
  • For instance, the category of Unclassed Forests in Nagaland, that have so far not been officially recorded or deemed forests despite centuries of protection and use by autonomous clans.
• Exclusion of Most Fragile Ecosystem
  • The Bill excludes some of India’s most fragile ecosystems as it removes the need for forest clearances for security-related infrastructure up to 100 km of the international borders.
  • These include globally recognised biodiversity hotspots such as the forests of northeastern India and high-altitude Himalayan forests and meadows.
• Exemption for Construction Projects
  • The Bill introduces exemptions for construction projects such as zoos, safari parks, and eco-tourism facilities.
  • Artificially created green areas and animal enclosures are very different from natural ecosystems which provide a bouquet of ecosystem services that contribute significantly to human well-being.
• Unrestricted Power to the Union Government
  • The Bill also grants unrestricted powers to the Union government to specify ‘any desired use’ beyond those specified in the original or amended Act.
  • Such provisions raise legitimate concerns about the potential exploitation of forest resources without adequate environmental scrutiny.
• Fear of Disenfranchising Forest People
  • The Bill makes no reference to other relevant forest laws. For instance, the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest-dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 finds no mention.
  • Instead, the exclusion and ease of diversion of forest areas will mean that forest people’s institutions no longer need to be consulted.

Way Forward

• Increase Participation of Forest People
  • In Nepal, the handing over of forests to local community forest user groups is credited to have helped the country increase its forest cover from 26% to 45% over just three decades.
  • If India is to meet its net zero carbon commitments and increase forest cover (as the Bill envisages in its Preamble), it would be wise to further the participation of forest people, rather than disenfranchise them.
• Need For a Balanced Approach
  • The system of forest clearances under the FCA (1980) may have been flawedand exceptions were needed.
  • The objective of fast-tracking strategic and security related projects is a fair ask.
  • Environmental clearance delays can and should be avoided by accelerating administrative procedures.
  • However, giving blanket exemptions from regulatory laws is not the answer.

Conclusion

• The importance of India’s natural ecosystems must be valued. Forests and other natural ecosystems cannot be considered a luxury. They are an absolute necessity.
• The existing systems provided an essential check to assess the impact of projects which change land use and to mitigate the impacts resulting from environmental destruction.
• If there were fault lines, it would have been better to fix them than to dismantle them.