The Draft National Forest Policy, 2018 includes pointers for sustainable management of our forests and urban tree cover. However, there are some glaring omissions and problematic areas that need to be addressed. For instance --
Private partnerships - This is unnecessary, as no private parties should have rights to implementation on forest land
Relaxing felling and transit regime of wood - This could lead to the problem of illegal transportation of timber and also have devastating consequences on tree cover.

This is a much-needed opportunity to contribute our suggestions and ensure that we have a robust Forest Policy that will not only nurture our forests but also protect the livelihoods of indigenous forest communities. We have already drafted an email template that covers the relevant points. Please feel free to add your own comments and rephrase or tweak the letter as you deem fit.

India’s forests are our lifeline, and this is our chance to perform a precious democratic duty. We have just about seven days to ensure the ministry takes into account these crucial recommendations.

Sources
Draft National Policy http://www.moef.nic.in/sites/default/files/Draft%20National%20Forest%20Policy%2C%202018.pdf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Letter : 

Subject : Draft National Forest Policy, 2018

Dear Sir, 

I am writing to you with regard to the Draft National Forest Policy, 2018 by the Forest Policy Division - Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. As a concerned citizen, I am sharing my comments and suggestions as requested by you, the deadline for which is April 14, 2018. 

While the 2018 Draft National Forest Policy takes into account various elements of sustainable forest and wildlife management, there are a few critical elements from 1988 National Forest Policy that are missing, which could mean indiscriminate devastation of existing forests.

Please find below a list of crucial sections from 1988 National Forest Policy that have been omitted. These points can also be found in this pdf: https://bit.ly/2Ixobk2

I strongly urge you to include them in the final draft of the National Forest Policy 2018: 

1. S 4.4 Diversion of Forest Land for non-forestry purpose of 1988 National Forest Policy is completely absent. 

Omission of this section allows for potential opening up of more forest land for non-forestry purposes. 

2. Section 4.6 Provisions for Tribal People and Forests in the 1988 National Forest Policy is completely absent.

2018 National Forest Policy uses terms like local communities and forest dependent communities - this broad and unspecified terminology would mean inclusion of migrant communities who in fact contribute to forest land encroachments and diversions.

3. While 2018 National Forest Policy does articulate threats, there is complete omission of mining and linear intrusion projects which was articulated in S4.4 of 1988 National Forest Policy.

Please find below a list of inclusions, or new articulations, in the 2018 National Forest Policy which are highly problematic and as a concerned citizen of the Republic of India, I want them to be amended. 

1. S4.1.1 (d) Increase the productivity of natural forests

This section only mentions "forest areas" and in the absence of S4.4, this could be interpreted as the opening up of more land to private partnerships. There must be clear demarcation of forest lands as defined in S2 of Forest Conservation Act. Forest lands currently defined as land inside any reserved forest shall not be opened to private partnerships. This includes plantation forestry. 

2. S 4.1.4 (a) (v) "Promotion of cultivation, harvesting, transportation and marketing of wood” would be ensured “by relaxing the existing felling and transit regime in the country”.

This could trigger series of passes for transportation and transit of illegal timber from forests, directly linking back to abuse by corrupt officials in forest and revenue departments.

Any relaxation of transit regime will have devastating consequences on natural forests as well as to tree cover outside forest land. This will exacerbate threat of landslides, soil erosion in hilly areas and active lobbying of timber mafia.

3. S 4.1.1 (d) talks about private partnerships on forest areas 

Why do we need private partnerships? No private party shall have rights to implementation on forest land. Private partnerships should only be for compensatory afforestation by means of finances. Implementation by private inside forest land could be disastrous in the current context.

4. Productivity of forest land is a term used with extractive mentality – This term must change to ecosystem services or there should be a clear definition of plantation forests that would be monitored for “productivity” and other forest land for its “ecosystem services”. 

5. Forest dependent populations and local communities should not be given rights on timber and non-timber forest products - This should be the exclusive right of indigenous communities. The above categories are broad in their definition giving rights to local migrant encroachers.

6. Private partnerships should be completely prohibited from forest lands including plantation forests to ensure there is no illegal squatting, encroachments or diversion for non-forestry purposes. An example is the banning of old leases on forest land.

I hope you will take my comments and suggestions into consideration. The aforementioned points are crucial in creating a strong National Forest Policy 2018 that will protect and nurture this country’s forest cover, apart from safeguarding the livelihoods of indigenous forest communities.

Thank you.