by FAO STAFF
ON 12 October 1894, the Government of India published an official document outlining the forest policy which it proposed to apply in the management of the country's public forests. This was a notable step. Many European countries had indeed been following established forest policies for centuries, but none seems to have taken the trouble to give official public expression to the underlying principles.
The fact that the present Government of India has thought fit to issue a new declaration of forest policy does not mean that the fundamental principles on which the 1894 declaration was based have been modified. In fact, those who have framed the latest document do not seem to consider that any further legislation for implementing the new policy is necessary. The existing Indian Forest Act remains in force unaltered in all the States where it is already applied, and the Declaration of 12 May 1952 recommends that the other States extend it in their territories. It is, therefore, only to the spirit in which the old law is to be implemented and to the objectives which it must pursue that the present declaration will give a fresh adjustment.
As is emphasized in the declaration of 12 May, it would be a mistake to attribute this new orientation only to political changes in India since 1894. The declaration says: "The part played by forests in maintaining the physical conditions in the country has come to be better understood", which means that the forests are better knows and that much progress has been made in silviculture and methods of timber utilization.
Before describing the new orientation in India's forest policy and analyzing the main points in the declaration of 12 May 1952, it is as well to note that its importance for India rests essentially in the unanimity with which it was adopted.
The vast sub-continent comprises many States with varying climatic as well as political, economic and social conditions. Early in May 1951, the Federal Forest Service submitted a draft declaration to a special meeting convened at Dehra Dun, to which FAO had been asked to send a representative. This meeting was attended by foresters, senior administrators, and Ministers of Agriculture and Forests from all the States of India. Agreement was not reached at once, and it was only subsequently, after a year's careful study by high officials, that an agreed text could be adopted as India's new declaration on forest policy.
The new declaration applies to all the forests of India, irrespective of ownership, and no longer only to forested State lands. That, however, is but a detail. The spirit of the new declaration differs essentially from the old in two noteworthy respects both based on the idea that forest is a national asset that must be so administered as to benefit the country as a whole, all other considerations taking second place.
First, the declaration of 12 May 1952 opposes "the notion widely entertained that forestry, as such, has no intrinsic right to land but may be permitted on suffrance on residual land not required for any other purpose". No doubt in 1894, in the face of the crying need for increasing agricultural production, priority could be given to requests for land clearance which aimed at increasing the area under cultivation. True, the old policy admitted of some limitation of this principle but the obstacles which it placed in the way of land clearance were readily circumvented, and this not only conduced to the destruction of forests from which local populations should have obtained their timber and fuel but "also stripped the land of its natural defences" against erosion by wind and water.
What, under the new policy, will be the future distribution of land between agriculture and forest? The needs of agriculture are admittedly no less in 1953 than they were in 1894; in fact, they are greater by far. But experience has shown that they must not be satisfied by indiscriminate extension of agriculture at the expense of the forest, and that the solution should rather lie in an intensification and improvement of farming methods which can only be possible on soil properly protected from erosion and where the farming community has assured supplies of fuelwood and timber. In other words, the distribution of land between agriculture and forest must be based on "a system of balanced and complementary land use under which each type of land is allotted to that form of use under which it can produce most and deteriorate least".
The second aspect in which the new policy is distinguished from the old is the strict restriction placed on the utilization of the forest by near-by communities. "The accident of a village being situated close to a forest does not prejudice the right of the country as a whole to receive the benefits of a national asset". Conservation and rational utilization of a forest obviously require the strict observance of certain rules. "While, therefore, the needs of the local population must be met to a reasonable extent, national interests should not be sacrificed because they are not directly discernible, nor should the rights and interests of future generations be subordinated to the improvidence of the present generation".
The new forest policy declaration sets out a functional forest classification, purely with a view to concentrating attention on the main function of each particular area, and in no way at variance with the Indian Forest Act classification which is based on the degree of management to which each stand is subjected.
The declaration is careful to distinguish between:
(a) protection forests;
(b) national forests;
(c) village forests;
(d) tree-lands.
The first three are self-explanatory. The fourth is new and is defined as "those areas which, though outside the scope of ordinary forest management, are essential for the amelioration of the physical conditions of the country".
It is intended mainly to cover artificial plantations, sometimes no more than a few trees which the farmer plants by his field. These woodlots, though they are technically within the responsibility of the Forest Service, could not possibly be created by it by reason of the very size of the task involved, which in fact requires widespread public support that can only be engendered by all officials concerned lending their active support to such a tremendous undertaking. The Indian Government does, in fact, envisage the planting of 30 million trees in 10 years. But the declaration estimates that 2,000 million are needed to "restore the hydrological nutritional balance of the country ", without regard to the additional benefits that villagers could derive in the way of fruits, forage and timber from field and strip plantings in purely farming areas, where lack of trees is often a real tragedy.
The declaration points out that the implementation of such a plan is not an idle dream. The success of the "Vana Mahotsava" (Festival of the Trees) already provides eloquent proof of this, which suggests that the Indian Delegation was on firm ground at the last session of the FAO Conference, in proposing the celebration of a "World Festival of the Trees" whereby all Member Nations of FAO that still had no annual ceremony for developing public consciousness of forest values, should forthwith take steps to institute such ceremonies.
The declaration of 12 May 1952 recommends that all Indian States in which private forest ownership is still of some significance should arrange for strict control of private forests "so that the indiscriminate exercise of individual rights may not prejudice or endanger the general welfare".
Control of the nature which the declaration has in mind is already being exercised in several States and it recommends the general application elsewhere of the systems which have proved successful. These entail compulsory subjection of private estates to management plans approved by the appropriate authorities, but limit by law the instances where the authority concerned may assume direct responsibility for management to cases where the owners are "tempted to sacrifice their capital for immediate gain".
Income from the forest in any case remains with the owner. But should present arrangements prove impractical or fail to arrest destruction or over felling of private forests, the Governments of the States are encouraged to introduce legislation enabling them to assume ownership of essential forest stands which appear to be threatened with extinction.
The problem of grazing is one of the more important and difficult matters confronting India's foresters.
It is well known that, because of the large number of animals retained by farmers, many of them having no economic value, there is continuous pressure for permission to graze in the forests near villages, to an extent far in excess of the forest's grazing capacity. This means a continual drain on resources and a potential danger to the forest stands and forest soil.
"Speaking generally", says the declaration, "all grazing in forests, particularly unlimited or uncontrolled grazing, is incompatible with scientific forestry".
Whatever original characteristics of its own Indian forestry may have acquired over the years, it remains the offspring of Western European forestry and such a sentence amply betrays this relationship. The idea behind the sentence might be more correctly expressed if it were said that all unlimited or uncontrolled grazing in forests was incompatible with the rational conservation of natural resources, which is true not only of grazing in forests but of grazing on all types of land. There appears to be a slight contradiction between this part of the declaration and a statement elsewhere that among the vital needs of the nation which justify the forest policy enunciated is the need for increasing grazing resources. The third class of forests, namely the village forests, are in fact defined as forests which have to "provide inter alia grazing for livestock".
Under the circumstances, it might have been more logical to recognize that at least some Indian forests, like those of many other regions, lend themselves to multiple use, of which grazing is one use of particular importance under present social and economic conditions in India, but that the use of the forest for grazing, like all other uses, must be strictly controlled and limited.
This, in fact, is the policy recommended by the present declaration and it deserves whole-hearted approval. It calls for the imposition of the regulations necessary, but accompanied by efforts to demonstrate to farming populations the ultimate benefits which will undoubtedly accrue. It requires the imposing of a "reasonable fee" for the privilege of grazing in respect of each animal involved, for "cheap forest grazing has a demoralising effect and leads to the vicious spiral of reckless increase in the number of cattle, inadequate forest grazing, reduced quality of the herds and further increase in the numbers to offset the fall in quality".
Sheep grazing must be very strictly controlled. As to goats, "special forest reserves under strict rotational control" should be created for them.
The declaration naturally stresses the principle of sustained yield and its application through carefully prepared working plans for all forests. It advises each State to set up within its forest administration a special service for the development of such plans, that is to say, for "their compilation, and revision and deviations from them, research and statistics, as well as to conduct detailed surveys of available forest resources which are a sine qua non for a sound forest management".
The declaration covers all the other relevant aspects of forest policy but naturally leaves to the discretion of the individual States the way in which they should work out their own policies within the framework of the general principles, so long as this is consistent with the higher national interests.
Mention is made of the close liaison that should exist between forest industries and foresters, particularly as regards research, but the declaration does not seek to lay down a policy of development for such industries. As things are in India today this is natural enough, because it is rather at the State level, and even at the level of each individual forest, that; such a policy can be worked out. Local conditions are too varied for a national declaration to be anything more than very general, to the effect that there is need for developing wood-using industries and that developments should keep pace with the development of forestry and forest production.
Of other recommendations in the declaration to which reference has not yet been made, special attention may be drawn to forestry education. Despite the diversity of local conditions, the declaration commends centralization of training for higher grades of forest officers and for forest rangers in the forest institutes and colleges at Dehra Dun, and emphasises the desirability of "inculcating an esprit de corps among forest officers, of developing a common outlook in forestry matters, and of ensuring concerted and integrated policies throughout the country".
There is also a paragraph on forest budgets where the creation of a sinking fund independent of the budget is recommended such a fund to be constituted by investment of a part of the revenues from the forests, more particularly during prosperous years. There is a warm recommendation that co-operatives of forest workers should be formed. Apart from their social and professional value, such associations help greatly to develop consciousness of forest values among rural populations. "Once the local population learns to look upon the forest as a means of its livelihood, a great step forward Will have been taken".
It was said at the beginning of this article that the document, published on 12 May 1952 by the Central Government, was of great importance to India. It may be said in closing that the declaration is also of importance from a regional and world standpoint.
At its Sixth Session in Rome, the FAO Conference recommended that all Member Nations put into practice the general "Principles of Forest Policy" which and been at that time formally adopted. Many countries, fortunately, have honored these principles over the years, yet a careful perusal of the Conference resolution may perhaps reveal certain difficiencies that could be made good.
India, however, is the first country which, through the voice of its Government, has adhered officially, explicitly and entirely to these principles.
