This refers to the article by M. A. Kawoosa about landlocked Kashmir. The author has just resorted to self-praise. I am restricting my response to his comments regarding forest policy in an attempt to save our forests from further degradation.

Environment is heritage for all. One has to understand the difference between hoarding and conservation. Conservation and development can and must go hand in hand to project a workable forest policy. Leading ecologists of the modern times recommend changing attitude of “Touch me not” to “Use me wisely” policy. Such policies are workable without much-unexpected backlashes. Polices framed on bold slogans without taking into consideration ground position have proved to be counterproductive. In many cases, such policies have only helped in deterioration beyond repairs. Extraction of timber under well-defined and monitored scientific system is quite different from ruthless exploitation carried out by timber smugglers.

As on date for one reason or the other timber is not readily available in timber depots throughout the valley. Scarcity of timber stocks in timber depots have created shortage of timber in market that has resulted in manifold increase in timber prices with the result timber smuggling has become highly lucrative. As per data, collected 3200 sawmills are in operation across Kashmir valley. Emboldened by patronage and due to lack of accountability, 2700 saw mills running across Kashmir valley are either illegal or have been running in complete breach of the supreme court orders passed in 2006 whereby it has ordered for banning the saw mills located within 8 kms from the borderline of territorial forests. As on date, about 1500 sawmills are located in the most sensitive "A" Zone of the forest divisions of Kashmir valley. Official sources have revealed that even the 500 sawmills, which have proper license have been resorting to illegal activities for profit making.

Could these illegal sawmills function if they could not get illegal timber? Would these illegal sawmills survive If timber had been available readily? Would anybody want to purchase timber from smugglers if he could get same legally? Would smuggling be lucrative business if timber were available to needy public at an affordable price?

For safety of forests first step should be to make timber available to common citizens of state. Adequate availability of timber in depots is most important factor necessary for checking smuggling of timber. Our main thrust should be to minimize scope for sale of smuggled timber. Conditions are to be created to make smuggling less lucrative whereas simultaneously efforts are to be made to create hurdles in smuggling of timber from forests. Ecological studies pertaining to continuous growth, stability and evolution of the ecosystem in the context of prevailing needs and aspirations of people are necessary for formulating sound and effective forest policy. . Foolproof system is to be devised to minimize misuse of supply of subsidized timber. Subsidy on timber is to be reduced gradually and the revenue so generated should be used for reclamation and rehabilitation of degraded forest. Developmental works in real sense should fallow every compartment wherefrom timber has been extracted. Avoid barbed wire and chain link fencing (which at presents consumes major component of development works in forest) in the forest development works instead biotic fencing needs to be prescribed.

Engagement of local labour in these forests works (extraction and development) who otherwise have taken up timber smuggling, as their means of earning their livelihood should be made obligatory.

The land grabbers and other land-mafia men have encroached upon 14,375 hectare of Forestland in Jammu and Kashmir. Out of the total forestland grabbed around 4877.62 hec. Land falls in Jammu region while nearly double of it (9497.64 hec.), pertains to Kashmir region. This is quite alarming and the real danger to our environment. Diversification of our forestland in the name of development be it roads, power projects or other so-called developmental schemes is going to have negative impact for our fragile ecosystem. Very few people voice their concern about this, as they do not want to antagonize power centers. One can site many examples wherein the considered opinion of ecologists has been buried in the dust-liking files. In many cases, diversification proposals have been cleared without even preliminary assessment regarding their impact on environment having been made. For that matter pollution, board clearance is given as per dictates of political compulsions.

I would request all students of ecology to contribute in evolving an effective forest policy, which can effectively address all directly and indirectly related issues so that our forests can be saved because otherwise our state has a history of implementing policies that have proved to be counter productive in the end.

(Author is a student of Ecology and Environmental Sciences. Feedback at sadaqat999@rediffmail.com)

Lastupdate on : Mon, 5 Jul 2010 21:30:00 Mecca time
Lastupdate on : Mon, 5 Jul 2010 18:30:00 GMT
Lastupdate on : Tue, 6 Jul 2010 00:00:00 IST