The decision to increase the deposit from Rs 200 per tree to Rs 1000 per tree was taken because very few of those who applied for tree cutting permission and deposited the amount returned to claim the deposit with proof of having planted trees. The rationale behind increasing the deposit by five times was to ensure that the people did indeed plant new trees and returned to claim the deposit.
But, while people who have sought permissions to cut trees, would be in habitable areas, what we are now looking at is half a lakh of trees being cut in the forest areas of the State. The forest ecosystem is very different from the non-forest green cover, as the former possesses high biodiversity and conservation value, so a decision to axe trees in the forests can never be easily taken. In this case, a number of the members of the State Wildlife Board – including MLAs – who were present at the meeting objected to the projects planned around wildlife habitation areas and also expressed their concern over the growing urbanisation and concretisation of the State.
It is true that Goa is speeding towards attaining an increasingly urban quality. That cannot be stopped or changed, but what can be done is that the path ahead can be planned in such manner that it does not interfere with the natural ecosystems, or if there is no other option than the effects of such projects have to be minimised to the largest extent possible. In this case, 50,000 trees for three projects is a cause of concern, and the government should reconsider its decision and look at options whereby the same projects can be realised but with fewer axing of trees. Development will always come at a price, but when the price is high it has to be brought down.
There is always the argument that replacement saplings will be planted, but planting saplings in forests is not the same as a natural forest cover. Goa has learnt this at a huge cost. Years earlier the State planted accacia trees in the forests and now, three decades later it has come to the realisation that these trees, which are not endemic to the State, provided neither food nor shelter to the wild animals. They are in fact useless to the State. There is, therefore, now the plan to plant local fruit bearing saplings in the State that will provide to the animal kingdom what they require.
We cannot afford such a mistake again, as there is evidence that Goa’s forest cover is diminishing. Last year, the government had announced its plans of planting saplings in comunidade land with the aim of increasing the green cover in the State. Deforestation has its own consequences and these are not the best for Goa. Environment activist Rajendra Kerkar, a member of the Wildlife Board and present at the meeting that decided on the tree cutting, in his book ‘Sacred Groves of Goa’ released some months ago, had said, “If Goa government does not take stringent action against the forces responsible for destroying forests, these institutions (sacred groves) protected by the community will become the thing of the past.”
Goa needs to strike a balance between development and environment. The State will change with newer projects coming up every few months and getting cleared. What it needs is to meet this challenge with an open mind which will make it easier to find solutions.
