7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

1/23

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

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

2/23

2

Contents P.no

1.)Introduction- - - - - - - - - - - 4

2.)Forest Protection- - - - - - - - - - 5

3.)Forest Administration in India- - - - - - - - - 5

4.)Acts and Administration Structure today- - - - - - - - 6

5.)Administrative Structure of the Forest Department - - - - - 9

6.)Wild life conservation- - - - - - - - - 10

7.)Wildlife Administration- - - - - - - - - - 10

8).Administartive Difficulties and solutions- - - - - - - 13

9)Judicial View of Forest & Wild life Administartion - - - - - 15

10) Flaws & Loop holes in forest acts & administration- - - - - - 16

11.)Government role in Administring laws Effectively- - - - - - 16

12.)Findings- - - - - - - - - - - - 17

13.)Conclusion- - - - - - - - - - - 18

14)Table of Cases- - - - - - - - - - - 19

15.)Bibilography - - - - - - - - - - - 20

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

3/23

3

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 Primaryobject has been to focus on the manner in which the administration has been envisaged by thestate, 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 internationalscenario.

Method of Analysis: I had begun with a historical analysis of the manner in which forest and wildlife administrationhas begun. I have looked at the two fields separately, in order to see the different developmentsin the two fields although there are various similarities, which have been highlighted. I haveattempted 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 towardssaving 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 toforest and wildlife; it merely tries to enumerate the trend of the administration over the years, theflaws in the same and the manner in which some have been rectified. It has also examined theareas in which the administrative efficiency has actually regressed. Discussed breifely aboutU.N.O negligence on world life protection across the globe. However, I was unable to actuallyvisit any of the protected areas, due to the short duration of the assignment. In addition, theresearcher has looked at only limited case law to examine the judiciary s opinion of theadministration. How the tribals effected by administration of Forests acts.

Chapterisation: This paper has been divided into sections to maintain continuity. The first section gives anintroduction to the nature of forests and wildlife and why they need to be protected. The secondsection deals with the various policies and laws important to the administration of forests. It alsodeals 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, policiesand plans. The fourth section deals with the various problems faced by the administration, bothin theory and practice, and offers some solutions after identifying the best practices.

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

4/23

4

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 wealthof the nation. Painfully, it also includes N number of endangerd species. A great deal has beenmade 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 essentialto maintain the earth s h ealth and environment. The earth is the only known living planet and itis 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 themaintenance climate, rain-patterns, water conservation,soil conservation.

They are the natural home of much type of animals, birds, reptiles, insects etc. They supplytimber, fuel, medicines, and wood for peeper-pulp and raw materials for many industries. Theincreasing 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 andthe administration towards the forests, there has been an irreversible depletion in the naturalresources. In fact businessmen who have merely commercial interest in the forests exploit thesame unscrupulously with the help of those very administrators and legislators who have a dutyunder 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 andenvironmental sustenance. The loss of forest cover and the knowledge that the country has barely19% 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 andfinally in the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.There are various efforts being made to conservethe 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 theconflicts in the objects of the forest and wildlife departments and their mandates, theadministration of the entire ecosystem becomes a difficult task. Thankfully there has been muchdebate about this and there has been a move to recently make the administration more humanfriendly, giving importance to the locals and their traditional style of living. In addition therehave been moves to bring all the environmental concerns under a wide umbrella Act which will

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

5/23

5

permit a harmonisation of the various claims and this is extremely important to ensure that thereis 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 oncecovered with forest. With the development of civilization, large areas have been cleared to makeway 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 forestthreatened or affected by abuse. The types of abuse that forest protection seeks to preventinclude:

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.Thedepartment administered forests on a small scale and a real administrative structure came intoeffect however, only with the enactment of the Forest Act, 1878, when the British realised theimportance 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 landwhich was strategic for their commercial interests, but left to the tribals those lands which werenot 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 Wikipedia3.nljsu.lawreview.4. UPADHYAY & UPADHYAY, HANDBOOK ON ENVIRONMENTAL L AW [hereinafter Upadhyay ] Vol. I, at 21 -2 2 ( 2 0 0 2 ) .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foresthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_explosionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_explosionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

6/23

6

Nonetheless the government was only permitted to de-reserve the forests under strict conditionswhere the benefit would far outweigh the adverse effects of converting forest land intoagricultural 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 thestate. 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 andIndian 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 thesame unclear objectives can be attributed to the present forest Acts as in the colonial times andthis, coupled with the lack of clarity in the hierarchy of the same has led to great difficulty inadministration. This can be seen by the changing policy with respect to the various industries andthe 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 forestswere under state control at the time. The state could determine that a forest was one of threecategories, being, a reserved forest, a protected forest or a village forest. In order to protect thesecategories 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 hasdeclared it as such, irrespective of which category it belongs to. Thus this Act still reflects thecolonial policy and administration under the same leads to great amounts of power vested in thestate and later policies differ in object. One of the main points is that this Act, though in force, isnot considered important while framing policies any longer. 8

b.) Indian Forest Policy, 1952:

In 1952, the Indian government, drafted a new national 2 policy which concentrated on the role of the forests as revenue earners and as a major tool for the defence forces. The governmentaccepted that the mode of administration in forests was unprofessional so far and that abalanced 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 review6. legal essays.com7. 001); Guha & Gadgil, State Forestry and SocialConflict in British India, 123 PAST AND PRESENT 141 (1989)

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

7/23

7

to the administration and management of forests. This policy was very ambiguous with respect tothe competing interests and the hierarchy of needs and this permitted the administrators to pursueits own interests within the very general guidelines prescribed by the policy. This was anunsatisfactory policy and the administration of forests reflected this since there was a definitetendency 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 growingcommercially valuable species. 9The Forests were continually burdened with increasing demandsfor timber and competing uses and the administration permitted the same without considerationto the adverse impact on the ecosystem.

c.) Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980

The 42 nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976 transferred the management of forests to theconcurrent list and the Centre was now entitled to enact legislation with respect to forests andwildlife 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 appeaseits 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 complexsystem essential to the survival of the country has led to extensive deforestation even post-independence. 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 part y s short term goals. 11

This Act followed the concerns about the increasing deforestation which was leading toecological 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 thesame time the states have not totally been restricted and are permitted to conduct any activitiesfor the conservation and development of forests and the wildlife. In addition, under the Act therehas been a change in the administrative set up whereby the Central Government is entitled toconstitute an administrative committee to advise the government on either granting permission touse 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 inglove 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 tothese 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 theadministration, the 1989 Amendment Act permitted forest officers to be prosecuted under theAct 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

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

8/23

8

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 commonvillage lands, strip plantations along roadsides and canal banks, and farm forestry. Although theschemes appeared to take off, well, the problem was that the farmers very rarely used any of thetimber for domestic purposes, but instead market the timber to industry and manufacturers toincrease their cash income in a less labour intensive task than agriculture, thus making the veryobject of the programme redundant. It also led to a situation where there was loss in employmentas 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 especiallysince the supposedly easy panacea to the problems of rural forestry did not lead to a solutionwhich 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 ensureenvironmental stability and maintenance of ecological balance. Economic benefit would besubordinate to this aim. This policy saw a renewed importance for the locals and forests withrespect to their rights to live and manage the forests. In this manner it followed from the socialforestry aims. However, the main object was to increase forest cover and this would even be atthe cost of people if necessary. Now however, this policy is used extensively and does provide agood starting point to forest administration, although it leaves the private sector to get materialsfrom farm forestry, without providing for the same. In addition it gives too little importance tothe 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 wastelanddevelopment. 14

f.) Joint Forest Management Programme :-

he JFMP has attempted to remedy some of these flaws of the 1988 policy. This also sees peopleas partners in the administration of forests rather than as a harmful element which must becontrolled or excluded. This programme has been adopted because the previous administrativestrategies 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 themost cost-effective mode of administering the forests, but the rights of the people were stilllimited 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 andengaged in felling of trees were given a hand in the management of the reserve. They have beengiven employment as tourist guides and they are now zealous protectors of the forests and

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

9/23

9

wildlife. This has not however, been recognised in all states where the locals are still consideredhindrances to the administration of forests, possibly as a result of the Centralising trend of all thelaws and policies. The forests are still in grave danger due to understaffed forest officials and theadministration 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 theMinistry of Environment and Forests, there has been a revision in the entire structure and themode of functioning. In contemporary times, almost every state has elected to amend the IFA tosuit 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 andTraining Divisions. Each of these has its own complex structures, but effectively theseorganisations administer and formulate policy at the National level. 17

At the state level the following structure has been envisaged 3:

1. At the head of every state, there exists a Principle Chief Conservator of Forests, who isactually the technical advisor of the state. Normally no legislation or policy is framedwithout his input and advice;

2. Next in the hierarchy comes the Additional Principle Chief Conservator of Forests, whoassists 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 themto conserve the forests including the power to file FIRs in criminal matters, and to fineoffenders. He is the one who actually spends time in the forests and tries to preventunauthorised persons from destroying the forests or acting in any manner contrary to theActs. 18

11-14- summary of forests acts(google)15. Tiwari Committee. Report of the Committee for Recommending Legislative Measures and AdministrativeMachinery for Ensuring Environmental Protection16.Administartive section forest laws.ministry of environment17. Indian Forest Policy, Forest Law, and Forest Rights Settlement:--sreechandran nljsu.

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

10/23

10

Although the Centre has a recent role in the administration of forests, it enjoys increasing powersespecially at the level of policy formulation. Since the revenue from the forests accrue to thestate, 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 tochange the policy and objectives of the same. This Bill again tries to maximise the power of thestate 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 hisfunctions including the power to determine the carrying capacity of the forest and disallowactivities 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 andthe administrative staff. This along with the limited importance it gives to the tribals would beconsidered its greatest flaws. However, this Bill has not been tabled before the Parliament eventoday. Thus the Forest Administration needs to take account of the JFMPs to a great extent toensure 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 tohumans .[1] Many nations are government agencies dedicated to wildlife conservation, which helpto implement policies designed to protect wildlife. Numerous independent nonprofitorganizations also promote various wildlife conservation causes. 4

Wildlife conservation has become an increasingly important practice due to the negative effectsof human activity on wildlife. An endangered species is defined as a population of a living beingthat is at the danger of becoming extinct because of several reasons. Either they are few innumber or are threatened by the varying environmental or predation parameters. The endangeredspecies 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, ReadingMaterial on Law of Wildlife Protection and Conservation of Forests, Centre for Environmental Law EducationResearch and Advocacy, Bangalore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endangered_specieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitathttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildernesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlife_conservation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlife_conservation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlife_conservation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_agencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_activityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_activityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_agencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlife_conservation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildernesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitathttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endangered_species

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

11/23

11

World Wildlife Fund (WWF), International Union for Conservation of Nature and NaturalResources (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 maintenanceof the life supporting processes of nature. The wildlife is considered to be a part of the foodchain which is essential to support this planet and definitely warrants protection. This isespecially 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 theadministrative 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 stateadministrative authorities around 1927, but this was mainly to protect hunting reserves.The firsttime 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 lawsand the setting-up of sanctuaries and large-scale national parks. To this end, they constituted theCentral Board of Wildlife under the Ministry of Food and Agriculture. Since wildlife wasexclusively 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 withinthe 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 continuedeven 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 42 nd AmendmentAct, made it applicable to all states. The Act seeks to protect wildlife through the creation of:

1. National parks;and2. Sanctuaries; and recently,3. Conservation reserve4. Community reserve.

The recognition of land as part of these areas decrees that the rights of people living in or makingtheir livelihood through these areas, if disturbed, be duly recognised and settled. Due to the broaddefinition of the term wildlife, which includes the habitat of the wildlife as well, the entireecosystem and the biodiversity is preserved by limiting the rights. The distinction in the rights

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

12/23

12

and the manner of notification between National Parks a 5nd Sanctuaries seems flawed however,and before determining the level of traditional rights, a more thorough scientific approach isnecessary rather than the current model of state discretion.

The Act envisages a complex administrative structure where the Central Government isempowered to appoint a Director of Wildlife Preservation along with assistant directors andvarious other employees to assist him in his functioning. At the state level, the WildlifeDepartment is headed by a Chief Wildlife Warden .He is in charge of the Wildlife and AssistantWildlife 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 supposedto promote the conservation and development of wild life and forests by such measures as theythink fit. In addition, the Act mandated that every state appoint a collector to determine the rightsof any person under the land which has been notified as a sanctuary. The State government wasmandated to constitute an advisory committee to advise the department on the measures to betaken 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 protectedareas are inhabited by local communities, who are heavily dependent on the same. There is thus aconstant conflict between the human rights and animal welfare activists with respect to the rightsin the forest and this makes administration very difficult. Human rights activists claim that tribalrights are denied, and at the same time, the administration is throwing open the protected habitatsto mining and other so called development projects which are ruining the habitats completely andare completely against the object of the Act. A middle path needs to be achieved and the Act hastried 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 conservationreserves 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 oftenhave 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 accountnothing 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 istherefore need for more field-work based and scientific studies to give better information on theranging and habitat use than the conventional natural history methods. This would ensure that thelaws 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 thatthe 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 stringentlaws 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 Cent red Approach,(1) JILI (1995), p. 145-181.

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

13/23

13

connections and the enforcers often are unable to do anything to prevent them. This isexacerbated by the fact that the officials are heavily understaffed and often do not have accesseven 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 andtimber 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 themanner in which wildlife should be conserved. It looks at legally notified areas as the main toolalong with the participation of communities and sensitisation of developmental factors towardsconservation issues. The NWAP recognises the need for legislators to become more ecologicallysensitised along with other citizens. Short term economic goals should not be permitted toundermine ecological security. By declaring these natural sites as ecologically sensitive zonesunder the EPA, the government can regulate all developmental activities in these areas andcensure that the wildlife is looked at. One of the problems is that they have only looked at theadministration of protected areas, to the detriment of the biodiversity outside the area. The Planapproves and gives a great thrust to the idea of community reserves, which has been added on bythe 2002 Amendment Act. One problem is that the role of the Panchayats has still not beenrecognised in forest administration. Nonetheless the plan is a step forward and steps should betaken 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 lawsamong which, the first codified law was the Wild Bird Protection Act, 1887, enacted by theBritish Government. The Government of India brought for the first time a comprehensive act, theWildlife Protection Act (WPA), 1972, which was later amended and changes were brought in asthe 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 andFlora (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 thewhole 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 animalhas been used and ivory imported into India.Section 9 of the Act prohibits hunting of wild animals and birds specified in Schedule I, II, andIII and IV, except as provided under Sections XI and XII. This classification has been madekeeping in mind the significance and population of wildlife. Those highly threatened find a placein Schedule I.

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

14/23

14

As of punishment for offences, Section 51 of the Act prescribes a maximum imprisonment of sixyears, 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 theforests 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 theWildlife. For one, the FCA, vests great amounts of power in the Central Government, while atthe same time, the National Forest Policy 1988, tries to give the locals more power inmanagement of forests in line with the 73 rd and 74 th 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 forestersthemselves. 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 upholdingscientific expertise in the management of forests. In addition, the administrators have, either attheir own behest, or due to political pressure, consistently put the interests of the industrialcommunity over ecological integrity and the local communities. The problem is that the Actsdon t recognise these various competing interests and the different Acts contemplate and giveweightage to different interests.

In fact, the laws relating to protection of the wildlife tend to conflict with the laws relating todevelopment; this often puts the administration in a dilemma as to which laws to follow andsince 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, bymaking 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 sinceforest officials cannot penalise the locals for following another policy set by another wing of thegovernment. 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 aholistic 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 solvethis problem, but the legislature has not approved of the same. There is definite necessity for thesame along with a more integrated approach to forest and wildlife, where both are paid equalattention and yet are looked at together to ensure more effective administration of flora andfauna, especially since Wildlife has been recognised very recently as important enough to have a

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

15/23

15

separate department for its conservation. In addition, the EPA, which purportedly provides for anadministrative 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 oneor two representatives sign an international treaty and then, since the same is binding on thecountry, 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 suggestionson how the problems might actually be resolved, since they have a stake in the issue are not evenaware 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 thestate 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 ForestDepartments are often helpless because of constant human encroachment and the lack of wildlifecorridors, 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 theforests, instead of merely forcing them to follow directions.

This attitude has also come in the way of the JFMPs(joint finance mortgaging programme) whichthe 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 hasrejected this to a large extent because of the reduction on their powers and in addition the statehas not taken account of regional differences while streamlining and adapting these programmesto individual states. However, the Central government has taken a step forward in admitting thatthe earlier failures were possibly due to a top-down approach in administration where few forestand wildlife guards attempted to protect the forest in opposition to the locals, instead of incooperation 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 andwildlife, 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 I ndia , where the courtset up a Centrally Empowered Committee to determine the grievances of all persons against theformation and determination of rights, and the administrative corruption with respect to protectedareas. Such a Grievance mechanism is essential to settle the different interests in forest lands andthe present mechanism envisaged by the Act is inadequate because the same department isdeciding the matter and hearing the grievances as well while settling rights.

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

16/23

16

There are many other cases where the Courts have had to intervene to restore justice when theadministration, 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 SthaapanaSamiti v. State f Karnataka , where the officials had permitted a Resort to function in the midstof 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 theadministrative 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 totrust 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 asChiru), 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 internationalmarket.In 1977, the Government of India declared the Chiru as protected under Schedule I of theWildlife (Protection) Act of India, 1972. Killing of Chiru is also in contravention to theConvention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), of which India is also asignatory 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 thegovernment to enact and enforce its wildlife law. Finally in 2002 the manufacture of Shahtooshshawls 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 naturalhabitats of the Forest lands. Permitting the unlawful mining in Forest lands, influencing thegovernment 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 Actto ensure tribals receive their entitlements. But the ministry has rejected its proposals

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

17/23

17

The National Advisory Council (NAC) has suggested ways to improve and reform the ForestRights Act that the United Progressive Alliance government introduced in 2006. According tolatest 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, thedispossession 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 theinfluence of the Maoists.

But the law has always been contentious and ambiguous in many aspects. According to a statusreport released by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) in August last year, of the 2.9 millionclaims settled under the FRA, only 1.6% offered community rights and most of those did notinclude rights over minor forest produce (MFP). The focus was mostly on giving individual titlesto agricultural and residential land.

The NAC s working group on tribal matters believes that the Act has been poorly implementedand 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 inextending timber rights.

primacy of the gram sabha as the quasi-judicial body that makes real decisions must bereinforced. The Act provides for it but the states and Centre have so far been trying todiminish the role of the village council.

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

18/23

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

19/23

19

and in exchange can help manage them.[xciii] In fact legitimising the rights of the users in theimmediate vicinity of the forests would actually motivate subsistence users to participate inafforestation programmes, thereby even reducing the cost of enforcement.since administrationdepends 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 thelocal and the forest dwelling communities. This can look towards preservation and due to thereduced burden on the administration they can look towards new initiatives to increase theamount of forest cover and protection of the wildlife. This would lead to a situation where, dueto scientific study, the communities could live in harmony with the forests and wildlife and leadto a richer and healthier ecosystem.

THE GREATNESS OF THE NATION CAN BE JUDGED BY THE WAY IT S ANIMALSARE 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.

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

20/23

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 People s Livelihood, 34(33) EPW (1999) p. 2305-

2310. 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 ParivartanSamudaya, 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 People s 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 Conservationof Forests, Centre for Environmental Law Education Research and Advocacy, Bangalore.

Mahesh Rangarajan, Imperial and India s Forest s: 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, Biodivers ity, Wildlife and Protected Area Management in India: APeople 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 Analysis-

I, XVII (44) EPW , (1983), p. 1882-1896. (Part I) Ramchandra Guha, Forestry in the British and Post -British India, an Historical Analysis-

II, XVII (44) EPW , (1983), p. 1940-1945. (Part II)

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

21/23

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

22/23

22

Acknowledgement

This project enti tled Doctorial study on Forest and Wild life Protection is submitted infulfilment 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 beendone only for LAW Project purpose only.The assistance and help during the execution of the project has been fully acknowledged. Verythankful to Madhavi. M , our teacher, for contributing his efforts in building this wonderful

piece.

7/29/2019 Environmental law project by Anudeep Mudiyala

23/23

23

Subject:- Environmental Law Submitted by:- M.Anudeep Reddy

Topic:- Indian Forest and Wild Life Administartion Roll no:- 200905, VII SEMESTER

A Critique